Status and potential of fisheries and aquaculture in … to...ASIA-PACIFIC FISHERY COMMISSION Status and potential of fisheries and aquaculture in Asia and the Pacific APFIC member

ASIA-PACIFIC

FISHERY

COMMISSION

Status and potential of

fisheries and

aquaculture in Asia and

the Pacific

APFICmember

Res t o fthe wor ld

Ch ina

0

20 000

40 000

60 000

80 000

100 000

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

1

Robin Lungren, Derek Staples, Simon Funge-Smith & Jesper ClausenFAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific

RAP PUBLICATION 2006/22

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United NationsRegional Office for Asia and the Pacific

Bangkok, 2006

Status and potential of fisheries andaquaculture in Asia and the Pacific 2006

ii

The designation and presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression ofany opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nationsconcerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area of its authorities, or concerningthe delimitation of its frontiers and boundaries.

All rights reserved. Reproduction and dissemination of material in this information product foreducational or other non-commercial purposes are authorized without any prior written permissionfrom the copyright holders provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of materialin this information product for sale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without writtenpermission of the copyright holders. Applications for such permission should be addressed tothe Secretary, Asia-Pacific Fishery Commission, FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific,Maliwan Mansion, 39 Phra Athit Road, Bangkok 10200, Thailand or by E-mail to [email protected].

© FAO 2006

For copies please write to: The SecretaryAsia-Pacific Fishery CommissionFAO Regional Office for Asia and the PacificMaliwan Mansion, 39 Phra Athit RoadBangkok 10200THAILANDTel: (+66) 2 697 4119Fax: (+66) 2 697 4445E-mail: [email protected]

iii

Foreword

The Asia-Pacific Fishery Commission (APFIC) provides its members with a regular overview ofthe status and potential of fisheries and aquaculture in the Asia-Pacific region. Fish and fisheriesare important in supplying animal protein and nutrition to a large part of the Asian-Pacificpopulations, and are increasingly becoming an important source of income and trade for the region.The region currently produces almost 50 percent of the world’s fish from capture fisheries andover 90 percent from aquaculture.

The region is very diverse and considerable differences exist within and among the seas in theregion. However, despite this diversity there are also many common trends that will havea large impact on the future of fisheries and aquaculture in the region. One alarming trend is therapid decline in the status of coastal fishery resources and ecosystems throughout the region.

Aquaculture production continues to increase at a rapid rate, with a large part of this increasebeing driven by massive growth in China. However, there are now several constraints that threatenits future growth. For example, aquaculture growth is dependent on the use of “trash fish” forfeeding the cultured species (either directly or by processed fish meal/oil), and is not sustainablein the long-term unless major changes take place in the management of capture fisheries and inaquaculture practices.

This 2006 report provides an update of the major trends and future potential for fisheries andaquaculture in the Asia-Pacific region and provides an insight into the many challenges that willneed to be addressed if fisheries and aquaculture are to continue to contribute significantly tofood security and poverty reduction in the region.

He ChangchuiAssistant Director-General and Regional Representative

FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific

iv

Preparation of this document

This document was prepared for the Twenty-ninth session of the Asia-Pacific Fishery Commission (APFIC),which was held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia from 21 to 23 August 2006. APFIC has assumed a new role asa “regional consultative forum”, and is endeavouring to respond effectively to the changing requirementsin the fisheries and aquaculture sector in the region. In support of the work of the Forum, APFIC iscommitted to improving the quality of information on the status and trends of fisheries and aquaculture inthe region and to regularly reviewing and analysing the information. This document is aimed at informingAPFIC member States of the current status and potential of fisheries and aquaculture in the Asia-Pacificregion as well as the emerging issues facing the sector.

Abstract

Lundgren, R., Staples, D.J., Funge-Smith, S.J. & Clausen, J. 2006. Status and potential offisheries and aquaculture in Asia and the Pacific 2006. FAO Regional Office for Asia andthe Pacific. RAP PUBLICATION 2006/22. 62pp.

The fisheries and aquaculture sector remains of fundamental importance to the Asia-Pacific region.Production from both capture fisheries and aquaculture has grown since 2002 (3 percent for capturefisheries and 14 percent for aquaculture). In 2004, the region contributed 49 percent of the globalproduction of captured fish (46.7 million tonnes) and 91 percent of global aquaculture (54.3 milliontonnes).

This huge production (and value) provides many opportunities for revenue generation, employment,and should contribute significantly to poverty reduction and increased food security of the region.However, there are many challenges that need to be met to make this a reality.

Using regional fishery data and information collated by FAO, this report provides a comprehensivepicture of production trends of fisheries and aquaculture and reviews the current status of fisheriesresources and aquaculture species and their contribution to national economies and food security.This is illustrated by a detailed view of sub-regions and aquaculture production by species groups.

The report also elaborates on two emerging issues that require closer attention in the future toensure sustainable development of the sector – illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishingand food safety and trade in fisheries and aquaculture.

v

Geographical scope of this review

States and areas

This review covers the States and entities of the Asia-Pacific region that report fisheries and aquaculturestatistics to FAO, and which are within the area of competence of the Asia-Pacific Fishery Commission.They are sub-divided into the following sub-regions;

Oceania: American Samoa, Australia, Christmas Island, Cocos (Keeling) Islands, Cook Islands, Fiji,French Polynesia, Guam, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), Nauru,New Caledonia, New Zealand, Niue, Norfolk Island, Northern Mariana Is., Palau, Papua New Guinea(PNG), Pitcairn Islands, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tokelau, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, and Wallis andFutuna Is.

South Asia: Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka

Southeast Asia: Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR (People’s Democratic Republic),Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Timor-Leste and Viet Nam

China: China PR (People’s Republic of), Hong Kong SAR (Semi-autonomous Region) andTaiwan POC (Province of China)

Other Asia: Iran, Japan, Kazakhstan, Korea DPR (Democratic People’s Republic of), Mongolia,Korea, RO (Republic of), Tajikistan and Uzbekistan

Production areas

In cases where the fishing occurs on the high sea or in Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) under accessagreements, although the production is assigned to the flag vessel, the catches made outside the regionalarea mentioned above are excluded from this review. The regional area covers the FAO Major FishingAreas (MFA) as follows:

Inland waters: Asia – Inland waters (MFA 04)Oceania – Inland waters (MFA 06)

Marine waters: Western/Eastern Indian Ocean (MFA 51 and 57)Northwest, Western/Eastern Central and (MFA 61, 71, 77 and 81)Southwest Pacific Ocean

Species

Data on aquatic mammals, aquatic plants, corals, pearls, sponges and crocodiles from capture fisheriesare excluded.

vii

Table of contents

Page

FOREWORD ............................................................................................................................................... iii

PREPARATION OF THIS DOCUMENT ...................................................................................................... iv

GEOGRAPHICAL SCOPE OF THIS REVIEW ............................................................................................ v

1. CONTRIBUTIONS OF FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC REGION ...... 1

1.1 CONTRIBUTION TO NATIONAL ECONOMIES ............................................................................................. 1

1.2 CONTRIBUTION TO POVERTY ALLEVIATION AND FOOD SECURITY ................................................................ 3

2. PRODUCTION TRENDS OF FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE .................................................. 5

2.1 CAPTURE FISHERIES PRODUCTION IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC REGION .............................................................. 5

2.2 AQUACULTURE PRODUCTION IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC REGION...................................................................... 8

2.3 STATUS AND TRENDS BY SUBREGIONS ................................................................................................. 11

3. STATUS OF RESOURCES ................................................................................................................ 23

MARINE WATERS ............................................................................................................................. 23

3.1 ASSESSING THE STATUS OF FISHERY RESOURCES................................................................................... 23

3.2 EVIDENCE FROM STOCK ASSESSMENTS ................................................................................................ 23

3.3 EVIDENCE FROM HISTORIC TRAWL SURVEYS .......................................................................................... 23

3.4 EVIDENCE FROM LARGE MARINE ECOSYSTEMS ....................................................................................... 25

3.5 EVIDENCE FROM FISHER’S PERCEPTIONS .............................................................................................. 32

INLAND WATERS ............................................................................................................................. 35

3.6 WATER RESOURCES ......................................................................................................................... 35

3.7 FISHERY RESOURCES ....................................................................................................................... 35

4. STATUS OF AQUACULTURE ........................................................................................................... 37

4.1 CARNIVOROUS SPECIES OR SPECIES REQUIRING HIGHER PRODUCTION INPUTS ............................................. 37

4.2 FINFISH REQUIRING LOWER INPUTS ..................................................................................................... 39

4.3 CRUSTACEANS ................................................................................................................................ 41

4.4 MOLLUSCS .................................................................................................................................... 43

4.5 AQUATIC PLANTS ............................................................................................................................. 43

4.6 REPTILES AND AMPHIBIANS ............................................................................................................... 44

4.7 NICHE AQUACULTURE SPECIES ........................................................................................................... 45

5. SELECTED ISSUES FACING FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE IN ASIA AND THE PACIFIC 46

5.1 ILLEGAL, UNREPORTED AND UNREGULATED FISHING (IUU) IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC REGION .............................. 46

5.2 SEAFOOD QUALITY AND SAFETY IN THE CONTEXT OF TRADE ..................................................................... 53

6. OUTLOOK FOR FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE IN ASIA AND THE PACIFIC ....................... 59

6.1 GLOBAL AND REGIONAL PREDICTIONS .................................................................................................. 59

6.2 UNEXPLOITED FISHERIES ................................................................................................................... 59

6.3 SMALL-SCALE FISHERIES .................................................................................................................. 60

6.4 AQUACULTURE ................................................................................................................................ 61

viii

Table of contents (continued)

Page

Tables

Table 1. Contribution of capture fisheries and aquaculture to GDP (2004) ......................................... 1

Table 2. Top five trading States in 2004 (World) ................................................................................... 4

Table 3. Top ten seafood trading States in 2004 (APFIC region) ......................................................... 4

Table 4. Estimates of low value/trash fish production in Asia-Pacific (tonnes) ................................... 7

Table 5. Top twenty capture production ................................................................................................ 9

Table 6. Top ten aquaculture producers States in (2004) ..................................................................... 10

Table 7. Top twenty cultured species in Asia-Pacific region by quantity ............................................ 12

Table 8. South Asia capture fisheries production, top ten species ..................................................... 14

Table 9. Southeast Asia capture fisheries production, top ten species .............................................. 14

Table 10. China capture fisheries production, top ten species .............................................................. 16

Table 11. Unidentified capture production in China ............................................................................... 18

Table 12. Other Asia capture fisheries production, top ten species ...................................................... 19

Table 13. Oceania capture fisheries production, top ten species .......................................................... 22

Table 14. Summary of stock assessments in selected APFIC countries ............................................... 24

Table 15. Comparison of catch, revenues, costs and profits ................................................................. 26

Table 16. The large marine ecosystems of the Asia-Pacific ................................................................... 28

Table 17. Status of tuna species in the Western and Central Pacific and in the Indian Ocean............ 34

Table 18. Aquaculture production reported under “marine finfish nei” ................................................. 39

Table 19. Tilapia top eight producer States (2004) ................................................................................. 40

Table 20. Countries exporting tilapia (2004) ........................................................................................... 40

Table 21. Carps and barbs top ten producer States (2004) ................................................................... 40

Table 22. Milkfish top four producer States (2004) ................................................................................. 41

Table 23. Penaeid Shrimp to ten producer States (2004) ....................................................................... 42

Table 24. Freshwater prawn top eight producer States (2004) .............................................................. 42

Table 25. Lower value molluscs top ten producer (2002) ....................................................................... 43

Table 26. Higher value molluscs top ten producer (2002) ...................................................................... 43

Table 27. Aquatic plants top ten producer States (2004) ....................................................................... 44

Table 28. Aquatic plants top ten cultured species (2004) ...................................................................... 44

Table 29. Niche aquaculture species (2004) ........................................................................................... 45

Table 30. Number of rejections at the border of EU from 1999-2002.................................................... 54

ix

Table of contents (continued)

Page

Figures

Figure 1. Net exporters and net importers in the APFIC region ........................................................... 4

Figure 2. Trends in global capture production ....................................................................................... 7

Figure 3. Trends in capture production by sub-region outside China .................................................. 7

Figure 4. Trends in capture production by species group outside China ............................................ 9

Figure 5. Trends in global aquaculture production ................................................................................ 10

Figure 6. Trends in aquaculture production of the Asia-Pacific region by environment ...................... 10

Figure 7. Trends in capture production of South Asia by environment ................................................ 13

Figure 8. Capture production of South Asia by major species groups ................................................ 13

Figure 9. Trends in aquaculture production of South Asia by major species groups .......................... 13

Figure 10. Aquaculture production of major species in South Asia ....................................................... 13

Figure 11. Trends in capture production of Southeast Asia by environment ......................................... 15

Figure 12. Capture production of Southeast Asia by major species groups ......................................... 15

Figure 13. Aquaculture production of Southeast Asia: proportion of major species groups ............... 15

Figure 14. Trends in aquaculture production of Southeast Asia by major species groups ................... 15

Figure 15. Trends in capture production of China by environment ........................................................ 17

Figure 16. Capture production of China by major species groups ........................................................ 17

Figure 17. Trends in aquaculture production of China by environment ................................................. 17

Figure 18. Trends in top eight cultured species in China ........................................................................ 17

Figure 19. Trends in major cultured carnivorous species production in China ...................................... 17

Figure 20. Trends in capture production of other Asia by environment ................................................. 20

Figure 21. Capture production of other Asia by major species groups ................................................. 20

Figure 22. Aquaculture production of other Asia: proportion of major species groups ....................... 20

Figure 23. Trends in aquaculture production of other Asia by major species groups ........................... 20

Figure 24. Trends in capture production of Oceania by environment .................................................... 21

Figure 25. Capture production of Oceania by major species groups .................................................... 21

Figure 26. Trawl surveys in the Asian region ........................................................................................... 24

Figure 27. Declines in the abundance of fish .......................................................................................... 26

Figure 28. Changes in the composition of the top ten species .............................................................. 26

Figure 29. Mean trophic level index for the Kuroshio Current LME ........................................................ 33

Figure 30. Mean trophic level index for the Yellow Sea LME.................................................................. 33

Figure 31. Mean trophic level index for the Bay of Bengal LME ............................................................ 33

Figure 32. Mean trophic level index for the Southeast Australia LME ................................................... 34

Figure 33. Trend in reporting by species for marine fishes in China PR ................................................ 39

Figure 34. Asia-Pacifc region showing the high seas areas in the Pacific and Indian Oceans and

national Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) and Territorial Seas .......................................... 48

1

1. Contributions of fisheries and aquaculture in the Asia-Pacificregion

Since the last APFIC publication on “Status and potential of fisheries and aquaculture in Asia and the Pacific”in 2004, capture fisheries have seen a small increase in terms of production while aquaculture has continuedto grow at a rapid rate. Both capture fisheries and aquaculture sectors continue to be of fundamentalimportance to the Asia-Pacific region in terms of food security, revenue generation and employment. Inmany of the countries, catching or farming aquatic resources forms a vital part of rural people’s livelihoods.Fisheries and aquaculture also have a deep cultural significance and are more than just a source of incomeor food supply; traditional fishery products such as fish sauce and fish-based condiments have alwaysbeen important ingredients of people’s daily diet which are not easily substituted. All sizes and types offish are utilised in a wide variety of ways and there is very little discard or wastage. The role that fish playin both the food security and nutritional security of many rural and coastal populations has often beenunderestimated in the past. It is also now recognised that fisheries and aquaculture are an importantcontributor to the national economies for some APFIC member countries, especially in the Asian region.Fish products are also the most heavily traded natural food commodity in the world and trade issuesinvolving fish are becoming increasingly important.

1.1 Contribution to national economies

Although not recognised as a major contributor toGDP in many countries, fisheries and aquacultureproduction is an important contributor to somenational economies across the Asia-Pacific region.

Estimates of the capture production value1 indicatethat the contribution of capture fisheries to GDPaccounts for more than one percent in many Statesin the region (Table 1). The fisheries sector playsa critical role in the national economies of SmallIsland Developing States (SIDS). The economiccontribution of fisheries production tends to beless in Southeast and South Asian States, yetthere are still eight of these States to whichfisheries contribute more than one percent ofGDP. It is also worth noting that these figures forfisheries value are probably underestimated anddo not adequately value the artisanal part of thesector. Overall, it is clear that more policy attentionshould be paid to this important production sector.

Aquaculture also makes an important contributionto GDP in the Asian region and it is increasing. InAsian States, the production accounts for over onepercent of GDP in six States. Statistics related toexport income from aquaculture products are notgenerally available and this affects the estimationof the contribution to foreign currency earningsthrough exports of aquaculture products.

Table 1Contribution of capture fisheries andaquaculture to GDP (2004)

Production value as percent of GDP2

Capture fisheries Aquaculture

Kiribati 36.171 Lao PDR 6.330

Marshall Is. 24.768 Viet Nam 5.166

Maldives 19.312 Bangladesh 2.399

Vanuatu 18.891 China PR 2.102

Solomon Is. 11.048 Myanmar 1.241

FSM 10.535 Thailand 1.020

Cambodia 7.884 Cambodia 0.914

Tuvalu 4.774 Indonesia 0.842

PNG 4.636 Philippines 0.769

Viet Nam 3.897 Korea DPR 0.520

Philippines 2.217 India 0.437

Tonga 2.152 Nepal 0.385

Indonesia 1.835 New Caledonia 0.378

Bangladesh 1.762 New Zealand 0.318

Myanmar 1.721 Taiwan POC 0.305

Samoa 1.632 Malaysia 0.283

Thailand 1.590 Iran 0.198

Cook Islands 1.548 Sri Lanka 0.195

Korea DPR 1.465 Korea RO 0.147

Sri Lanka 1.281

Fiji 1.208

Lao PDR 1.163

1 The data to quantify the value of capture production is notreadily available for many States. As indicative figures, unitvalue of 0.8 US$ per kg was applied for this estimation ofcapture production value.

2 GDP values in 2003 calculated from the ESCAP officialstatistics except Taiwan POC.

2

It is clear that the State listings above also closelymatch those States which export considerableamounts of aquaculture products (particularlyshrimp). China PR is an exception in this casesince the majority of aquaculture products itproduces are consumed domestically, althoughthere is an increasing trend towards exportfocussed products.

It should be noted that besides makinga considerable contribution to the nationaleconomies in terms of earnings from export ofproducts from fisheries and aquaculture, thesefigures often mask the real importance to thenational economy in terms of poverty alleviationand nutritional benefits.

Employment, income and trade

Very little information on employment in fisheriesand aquaculture exists in the Asia-Pacific regionand only a few States report the number of fishersand fish farmers. Despite this, there are clearindications that fisheries and aquaculture playa substantial role in providing vital incomegeneration opportunities to the people. Forexample, China, the country with the highestnumber of fishers and fish farmers, had anestimated 12.2 million engaged in fisheries andaquaculture production in 2004, accounting forabout 30 percent of the world’s total. In India,7.9 million of male and 2.7 million of femaleworkers were directly engaged in fishing and fishfarming. In the Philippines the fisheries sectorprovides direct and indirect employment to overone million people, or about 12 percent of theagriculture, fishery and forestry sector workforce3

and in Viet Nam more than 1 million people areemployed in the aquaculture industry.4

FAO (2004)5 estimated that Asia accounted for87 percent of the total global number of personsengaged in fisheries and aquaculture production(total 38 million). [new figures will be publishedin FAO (in press)6]. These figures typicallyrepresent full time fishers and those for whomfishing is a highly significant activity as well asfull time aquaculture farmers. The figures forpeople involved in fisheries seasonally or asa supplemental part of a more diverse livelihood

are difficult to estimate and are often not recorded.Figures, therefore, represent lower thresholds.

However, although the number of people employedin fisheries and particularly in aquaculture hasincreased in several countries in the region, thenumber in developed countries such as Japan hasdeclined (a decline of over 50 percent between1970 and 2004).

In addition to those people involved directly in theprimary production sector, it should be noted thatthere are a number of people who are engagedin the supporting industries of fisheries andaquaculture such as boat building, ice making,feed manufacturing, processing, marketing anddistribution of fisheries and aquaculture products.As demand outstrips supply, the price of fish isincreasing worldwide and fish is becoming a “cashcrop”. In many cases, the more marketable fishare being sold to provide income that is used topurchase other more affordable food items.Fisheries and aquaculture therefore both act tosecure nutritious food for rural and coastalpopulations and to alleviate poverty. This isdiscussed in detail in section 1.2.

Fish products are highly traded commodities in theAsia-Pacific region bringing valuable foreignexchange earnings to exporting States. In fact, fishproducts are the most highly traded naturalcommodity globally and trade is increasing. Totalworld trade reached a record value of US$71.5billion (export value) in 2004. This was a 23 percentincrease relative to 2000.

The five top global markets for fish are Japan, USA,and the EU counties of Spain, France and Italy. Interms of exports, two APFIC countries are in thetop five (Table 2).

China PR has been the top exporter in the regionsince 1999, exports reaching US$6.8 billion in2004. Thailand is the second largest exporter,followed by Viet Nam exporting US$4.1 billion andUS$2.4 billion tonnes respectively in 2004(Table 3). Within the region Japan is main marketand is followed by China PR, Korea RO and China,Hong Kong SAR. China and Thailand top theexporters list.

Exports totalled US$22.2 billion, while importstotalled US$26.0 billion within the top ten Statesin region. Many of the countries, especially China,now import large quantities of fish meal to fuel itsaquaculture growth.

3 Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources of thePhilippineshttp://www.bfar.da.gov.ph/programs/gma_fisprogrm/fish_sector.htm

4 MOFI 2006.5 FAO SOFIA FAO Rome 2004.6 FAO SOFIA FAO Rome (in press).

3

Many developing countries have now become netexporters of fish, rather than net importers, a trendmost evident in the Southeast Asia region.Figure 1 shows the difference between the importsand exports for the top trading countries in theregion. The quantity of imported fisheries productsin China PR exceeded that of exported productsin 2004; however, China PR achieved a remarkabletrade surplus of US$3.6 billion from fisheriesproducts, which is an increase of US$1.2 billionfrom 2002, indicative of the strong value addingthat occurred in the process.

Trade for fish is particularly important in SmallIsland Developing States (SIDS) where land-basedresources are very limited – the contribution offisheries products can be as high was as high as80 percent of total exported commodities of theState. Other countries with a trade surplus of thissize are the big net exporters such as Indonesia,Thailand and Viet Nam.

1.2 Contribution to poverty alleviation andfood security

Importance of the fisheries sector in povertyalleviation

Although rapid economic growth in the region,especially in India and China, has lifted a largenumber of people out of poverty, almost 690 millionpeople still l ive on less than US$1 a day inAsia-Pacific. Almost all analyses on povertyalleviation conclude that economic growth byitself will not be sufficient to alleviate poverty andreduce food insecurity unless targeted pro-poorinterventions are also applied. FAO7 has justpublished another in its series of TechnicalGuidelines to support the implementation of theCode of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries thatoutlines how the contribution of small-scalefisheries to poverty alleviation and food securitycan be increased. It advocates a vision in whichsmall-scale fisheries potential to contribute tosustainable development is fully realised. It

recommends greater emphasis on legislation andpolicy to support the poor and advocates (i) bettermanagement that includes managing small-scalefisheries; (ii) making markets work for the poor;(iii) financing poverty alleviation; and (iv) appropriateinformation, research and communication.

Importance of fish in human nutrition

The fact that fish is of high nutritional value iswell known. Less well-known is the significantcontribution that it makes to the diet of manyfish-consuming communities in both the developedand developing world.

Fish provides high quality protein and a widevariety of vitamins and minerals, includingvitamins A and D, phosphorus, magnesium,selenium, and iodine, especially in marine fish.Fish is also a valuable source of essential fattyacids and its protein is easily digestible.

Even in small quantities, fish can have a significantpositive impact on improving the quality of dietaryprotein intake by complementing the essentialamino acids that are often present in low quantitiesin the rice-and-vegetable diets typical of manydeveloping States. In particular, fish is a richsource of lysine which is an essential amino acidthat is often deficient in rice diets with little animalprotein.

Recent research shows that fish is much more thanjust an alternative source of animal protein. Fishoils in fatty fish are the richest source of a type offat that is vital for brain development in unbornbabies and infants. This makes all fish andespecially fatty fish, such as tuna, mackerel andsardine, particularly good components of the dietof pregnant and lactating women. It is thereforeapparent that fish makes a valuable contribution tothe nutritional quality of the diets of the populationsof many developing countries in the Asia-Pacificregion.

7 FAO, 2005. Increasing the contribution of small-scalefisheries to poverty alleviation and food security. FAOTechnical Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries 10.

4

Table 2Top five trading States in 2004 (World)

Imports Exports

Country (Million US$) Country (Million US$)

1 Japan 14 830 1 China PR 6 780

2 USA 12 079 2 Norway 4 171

3 Spain 5 239 3 Thailand 4 053

4 France 4 217 4 USA 3 693

5 Italy 3 919 5 Peru <2 500

Table 3Top ten seafood trading States in 2004 (APFIC region)

Imports Exports

Country (Million US$) Country (Million US$)

1 Japan 14 830 1 China PR 6 780

2 China PR 3 168 2 Thailand 4 053

3 Korea RO 2 259 3 Viet Nam 2 409

4 China, Hong Kong SAR 1 929 4 Taiwan POC 1 809

5 Thailand 1 255 5 Indonesia 1 688

6 Australia 731 6 Korea RO 1 246

7 Singapore 636 7 Japan 1 112

8 Malaysia 538 8 Australia 922

9 Taiwan POC 518 9 New Zealand 842

10 Viet Nam 177 10 Philippines 454

Figure 1Net exporters (red bars) and net importers (green bars) in the APFIC region. Values aremillions of US$

-15 000 -10 000 -5 000 0 5 000 10 000 15 000

Japan

China, Hong Kong SAR

Korea RO

Singapore

Malaysia

Australia

Philippines

New Zealnd

Taiwan POC

Indonesia

Viet Nam

Thailand

China PR

Mil

lio

n U

S$

5

2. Production trends in fisheries and aquaculture

The Asia-Pacific region continues to be the world’s largest producer of fish. In 2004, this amounted to87.1 million tonnes – 46.7 million tonnes from capture fisheries and 40.4 million tonnes from aquaculture[total aquaculture production less aquatic plants]. This represents 49 percent and 89 percent of the globalproduction, respectively. When aquatic plants are included in the total aquaculture figures, aquacultureproduction outstrips that of capture fisheries for the first time (total aquaculture production of 54.3 milliontonnes and 91 percent of the world’s production).

Capture fisheries increased by 3 percent over that of 2002 (driven mainly by growth in Southeast Asia)and 14 percent for total aquaculture (driven mainly by growth in China and Southeast Asia). Of the topten producers of capture fish, five States were from the Asia-Pacific region (China (1st), Indonesia (5th),Japan (6th), India (7th) and Thailand (9th). For aquaculture, China alone is reported to have produced70 percent of the world’s aquaculture production (about four times greater than Peru’s fisheries production,the number two fishery producer worldwide).

The fisheries of the Asia-Pacific region are dominated by pelagic species – in many sub-regions it is smallpelagics that are the dominant group. The proportion of low value/trash fish is increasing in many areas,a trend that is meeting the growing demand for these fish for livestock/aquaculture feeds. Freshwaterfish dominates aquaculture production. As expected, there is considerable variation in general trendsamong the five main sub-regions of Asia and the Pacific. Production from China, South Asia and SoutheastAsia continues to grow. Capture fisheries production from Japan, Korea DPR and Korea RO have showna steady decline over many years, while aquaculture production has remained relatively stable. Oceania’sproduction is minor compared with the other sub-regions, but continues to increase, although many of thefisheries in the Pacific small island developing States, that operate at a subsistence level, are not recorded.

2.1 Capture fisheries production in theAsia-Pacific region

Production from the Asia-Pacific region’s capturefisheries has increased by 1.3 million tonnes since2002 and totalled 46.7 million tonnes in 2004. Thisrepresents an overall 3 percent increase over thatof 2002. Inland capture fisheries have increasedby 5 percent while that of marine capture fisheriesincreased by only 2.5 percent.

The region has been the world’s largest producerof fish for decades, and contributed 49 percent ofglobal production in 2004. Of the top ten producersof capture fish in the world, five States come fromthe Asia-Pacific area, namely China PR (1st),Indonesia (5th), Japan (6th), India (7th) and Thailand(9th). Total capture fisheries production has steadilyincreased since 1950, mainly from the marinecapture fisheries sector (Figure 2). In inlandwaters, the regional share has had a minordecrease to 64.1 percent.

China PR is still by far the largest producer in theregion with a reported production of 16.9 milliontonnes in 2004, representing 37 percent of regionalproduction. This is more than three times greaterthan the second largest producer in the region –Indonesia. Because of this enormous scale of

production, China1 is treated as a distinctsub-region in this review.

With the exception of China, total capture fisheryproduction from marine waters peaked in 1989 at25.5 million tonnes and then gradually declined.However, there appears to have been a gradualincrease in recent years and has almost reachedthe same level of 1989 again, i.e. 25.2 milliontonnes in 2004.

As seen in Figure 3, Southeast Asia has continuedto increase production and has maintained thelargest share (excluding China) of the APFIC regionsince 1994. Growth in South Asia has occurred but

1 In this document, “China” refers to the sub-region thatincludes China PR, Hong Kong SAR, Macao SAR andTaiwan POC.

Top ten producers of capture fish in 2004 wereChina PR, Peru, USA, Chile, Indonesia, Japan,India, Russian Federation, Thailand and Norway;five of these are in the Asia-Pacific region.

The top ten producers amount to 58 percent ofthe total global production.

6

is relatively slow. The “other Asia” sub-region usedto be the top contributor to the region, but hasexperienced a serious and continuous decline inproduction since 1988.

The recent increase in marine capture fisheries overfigures for 2002 has occurred mainly in SoutheastAsia, in particular Indonesia (12 percent increase),Philippines (9.5 percent), Viet Nam (10 percent),Myanmar (10 percent). Major increases in catchhave also occurred in many of the previously minorproducers in the Pacific such as the Cook Islands,Papua New Guinea, Tuvalu and Vanuatu that haveall witnessed increases of over 50 percent asa result of an increasing share of the tuna catch.Major decreases have been reported by India(-5.1 percent), Korea RO (-6.0 percent), NewZealand (-6.35 percent) and Pakistan (-7.7 percent).

In inland waters, global capture fisheriesproduction,2 in general, has increased and itsreported growth in the late 1990s was remarkable.However, it was during this period that a changein the way several States estimated their inlandfisheries production occurred and it is likely thatearlier production was underestimated. Myanmarhas recently reported considerable increase in itsinland fisheries production which is attributed toincreased enhancement, but also due to improvedunderstanding of the production from the “inn”fisheries (concession fisheries). Even today, thereis considerable uncertainty about inland productionfigures – for example, Coates3 estimated thatproduction from Southeast Asia was possiblyunder-reported by a factor of between 2.5 and 3.6.

Total inland production of the region in 2004 wasreported as 5.9 million tonnes. The increase overthat of 2002 has come mainly from Myanmar(78.2 percent), China PR (0.1 percent but stilla relatively large quantity), Bangladesh (6.3 percent) and India (3.8 percent). Large decreaseswere reported in Cambodia (-30.6 percent),Viet Nam (-35.6 percent), Pakistan (-5.9 percent)and Laos P.R (-10.9 percent). South Asia andSoutheast Asia contributed the greatestproduction compared with other sub-regions.(Figure 3).

The proportion of low value/trash fish is increasingthroughout much of the region. In this report, thisterm refers to fish that are generally of relatively loweconomic value and typically small sized. They canbe used for either human consumption or as animalfeeds (both fish and livestock). They may be useddirectly in both aquaculture to feed other fish orprocessed into fish meal/oil for incorporation intoformulated diets. In human food, the fish may beconsumed directly, or further processed often usingtraditional methods of processing small fish.

Unfortunately there are very few records of theamount of low value/trash fish currently being takenin the APFIC region. This is partly due to the factthat the term “trash fish” is used to mean differentthings in different States making reporting difficult– in some States it only refers to fish that is usedfor livestock/fish food, while in others it covers bothlivestock/fish food and human food. This broadrange of use of the term means that it is difficultto agree on a common generic term and definition.

Recent reviews of low value/trash fish have beencarried out in Bangladesh, China PR, India,Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand.4 Use wasalso made of a similar study carried out by theAustralian Centre for Agriculture Research (ACIAR)in Viet Nam.5 A summary of the estimates of theamount of low value/trash fish being caught inthese countries (no estimate was available forIndonesia) is presented in Table 4.

The percentage of low value/trash fish recordedin these countries ranged from 4 percent to38 percent of the total marine capture landings. Insome regions of Viet Nam, Thailand and China PRthe percentage was in excess of 50 percent,especially in areas where low value/trash fish arebeing targeted. The weighted average percentageacross the region was 25 percent.

A very approximate “back of the envelope” wasused to trace the flow of fish products through to(i) direct human use and (ii) indirect human usethrough aquaculture. For 2003, the recorded Asiancapture fishery landings was about 39.3 milliontonnes (for all carnivorous and omnivorous fishand excluding molluscs and seaweeds) andthe latest estimate for discarding is 1.8 percent

2 It is common knowledge that fisheries information systemsin the region have been particularly weak in inland areas. Therelatively low level of inland capture production could besimply a reflection of poor quality of information.

3 Coates, D. (2003). An overview of inland capture fisherystatistics of Southeast Asia. In: New approaches for theimprovement of inland capture fishery statistics in the MekongBasin. FAO & MRC, RAP Publication 2003/01. 45 pp.

4 Funge-Smith, S., Lindebo, E. & Staples, D. (2005). Asianfisheries today: The production and use of low value/trashfish from marine fisheries in the Asia-Pacific region, RAPpublication 2005/16.

5 Edwards, P., Tuan, L.A. & Allen, G.L. (2004). A survey ofmarine trash fish and fish meal as aquaculture feed ingredientsin Vietnam. ACIAR Working paper 57.

7

* Excluding aquatic plants Unit: 1 000 tonnes

Inland waters Marine waters

Southeast Asia

South Asia

0

1 000

2 000

3 000

4 000

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Southeast Asia South Asia Other Asia Oceania

Southeast Asia

South Asia

Other Asia

0

10 000

20 000

30 000

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Figure 2Trends in global capture production

Figure 3Trends in capture production by sub-region outside China


Inland waters Marine waters

APFIC w/o China

China Rest of the world

2 000

4 000

6 000

8 000

10 000

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

APFIC w/o China

China

Rest of the world

0

20 000

40 000

60 000

80 000

100 000

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

0

Table 4Estimates of low value/trash fish production in Asia-Pacific (tonnes)

Country Low value/trash fish % of catch Dominant gear Year of estimate

Bangladesh 71 000 17 Gill nets (48%) 2001-02

Set bag nets (42%)

China PR 5 316 000 38 Trawl 2001

India 271 000 10-20 Trawl 2003

Philippines 78 000 4 Trawl (41%) 2003

Danish seine (22%)

Purse seine (12%)

Thailand 765 000 31 Trawl 1999

Viet Nam 933 183 36 Trawl 2001

8

(i.e. 720 000 tonnes), giving a total capture figureof 40.0 million tonnes.

Applying a 25 percent low value/trash fish factorto the landed catch gives a figure of 9.8 milliontonnes being used for livestock/fish, and29.5 million tonnes being used directly for humanconsumption. The total aquaculture from Asia forall fish excluding molluscs and seaweeds isestimated as 28.0 million tonnes. From thesefigures, it is clear that the diversion of marine fishvia aquaculture is providing a very significantproportion (approximately 50 percent) of the totalfish provided to humans (both within Asia andexported to other more developed countries). Anincreasing proportion of this is high-valuedcarnivorous species and increasingly dependent onimported fish meal/oil.

Just looking at total capture fishery production,however, masks considerable differences in thetrends of the main species groups (Figure 4).Demersal marine fish peaked at 6.4 million tonnesas early as 1974 and then declined to the lowestlevel at 4.4 million tonnes in 1991. Production thenlevelled off and was up to 4.5 million tonnes in2004.

Pelagic marine fish peaked at 11.8 million tonnesin 1988 and subsequently decreased to theproduction levels seen in the early 1980s. In 2004it was 9.9 million tonnes. Other species groupssuch as freshwater/diadromous fish, crustaceansand cephalopods have grown steadily whilemollusc production has levelled off at around800 thousand tonnes.

It is important to realise that the region’s catch isdominated by pelagic marine species and in manysub-regions by small pelagic species (e.g.Japanese jack mackerel, Japanese anchovy, chubmackerel, Pacific saury, Indian oil sardine, Indianmackerels and scads).

The top twenty species in the region (Table 5),however, show considerable changes in therankings over time. It is significant that thereduction in catch of single dominant species suchas Alaska pollock6 in the early 1970s and chubmackerel7 in the late 1970s resulted in changes inrelative ranking of large pelagic marine species(i.e. skipjack tuna and yellowfin tuna) in 2000 thathas carried through to 2004. When the Chinesefigures are included, the large catches of largehead

hairtail (1.6 million tonnes), akiami paste shrimp(Acetes spp.) (681 thousand tonnes) and JapaneseSpanish mackerel (428 thousand tonnes) increasestheir importance in the overall rankings.

Unfortunately, there is still a considerable captureproduction that is not identified to the species levelbut recorded as marine/freshwater fishes nei,8

marine/freshwater molluscs nei and marine/freshwater crustaceans nei. The quantity reportedunder these categories has for some sub-regionsbeen increasing significantly in recent years, whichindicates a worrying trend in available statisticalquality. In 2004, 14.3 million tonnes or 31 percentof capture production was not identified to species,order, or family level. It is notable that China PRhas improved its reporting on individual species.The reporting on nei species has been reduced byalmost 3 million tonnes or from 47 percent onreported capture production in 2002 to 31 percentin 2004.

2.2 Aquaculture production in theAsia-Pacific region

The Asia-Pacific region produced 40.4 milliontonnes of aquaculture – 89 percent of globalaquaculture production (total aquacultureproduction less aquatic plants). In terms of value,the region’s share is slightly less, but is still78 percent of total value of global aquaculture.When aquatic plant production is included (the vastmajority of which originates in the Asia-Pacificarea), the region becomes even more dominant,representing 91 percent of global aquacultureproduction by quantity and 80 percent by value.

6 Its highest production was 2.7 million tonnes in 1973.7 Its highest production was 1.7 million tonnes in 1978.

8 Nei = not elsewhere included.9 Growth rate for the period of 1991-2004 was 11.6 percent

excluding aquatic plants production.

The growth of aquaculture production in the regionhas continued to be very strong, reflecting thetrend for the last ten years. This results mainlyfrom continuously increasing production fromChina PR.9 Between 2002 and 2004, production

Top ten aquaculture producer States by quantity(excluding aquatic plants) in 2004 were China PR,India, Viet Nam, Thailand, Indonesia, Bangladesh,Japan, Chile, Norway and USA. Asian States holdthe top seven positions.

By value, China PR, Japan, India, Chile, Viet Nam,Indonesia, Norway, Thailand and Bangladeshare amongst the top ten producer States. (seeTable 6)

9

Table 5Top twenty capture production species in the Asia-Pacific region

1960 1980 2004 (without China) (Production) 2004 with China (Production)

1 Jap. jack mackerel Chub mackerel Skipjack tuna 1 339.9 Japanese anchovy 1 795.8

2 Jap. flying squid Alaska pollock Japanese anchovy 692.4 Skipjack tuna 1 550.1

3 Japanese anchovy Skipjack tuna Natantian decapods 621.9 Largehead hairtail 1 548.6

4 Chub mackerel Natantian decapods Scads nei 602.1 Scads nei 1 226.7

5 Pacific saury Jap. flying squid Chub mackerel 524.6 Natantian decapods 1 051.6

6 Alaska pollock Japanese anchovy Yellowfin tuna 518.6 Chub mackerel 1 036.2

7 Indian oil sardine Indian oil sardine Indian mackerel nei 497.8 Marine molluscs nei 927.8

8 Natantian decapods Croakers, drums nei Japanese flying skid 447.4 Croakers, drum nei 753.2

9 Scads nei Yellowfin tuna Croakers, drums nei 418.4 Squids nei 725.2

10 Indian mackerel Sardinellas nei Sardinellas nei 408.3 Akiami paste shrimp 681.4

11 Sharks, rays, skates Stolephorus anchovies Carangids nei 344.6 Yellow fin tuna 624.4

12 Yellowfin tuna Indian mackerels Indian oil sardine 327.8 Indian mackerel nei 497.8

13 Skipjack tuna Sharks, rays, skates Alaska pollock 319.4 Jap. flying squid 447.4

14 Clupeoids nei Pacific saury Yesso scallop 313.8 Jap. Spanish mackerel 428.0

15 Croakers, drums nei Scads nei Jap. jack mackerel 279.8 Sardinellas nei 408.3

16 Indian mackerel nei Clupeoids nei Frigate & bullet tunas 263.0 Freshwater molluscs nei 406.2

17 Bigeye tuna Tuna-like fishes nei Cephalopods nei 262.7 Silver pomfrets nei 386.5

18 Stolephorus anchovies Ponyfishes nei Chum salmon 261.6 Gazami crab nei 347.0

19 Marine fishes nei Marine fishes nei Marine fishes nei 6 210.9 Marine fishes nei 8 816.3

20 Freshwater fishes nei Freshwater fishes nei Freshwater fishes nei 2 295.2 Freshwater fishes nei 4 019.3

Unit: 1 000 tonnes

Figure 4Trends in capture production by species group outside China


0

4 000

8 000

12 000

1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Freshwater and diadromous fish Demersal marine fish Pelagic marine fish

Misc. marine fish Crustaceans Cephalopods

Molluscs (excl. cephalopods) Misc. aquatic animals

10

Marine waters


Inland waters

0

3 000

6 000

9 000

12 000

15 000

18 000

21 000

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

China APFIC w/o China Rest of the world

0

3 000

6 000

9 000

12 000

15 000

18 000

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

Table 6Top ten aquaculture producer States in (2004) (excluding aquatic plant production)

By quantity By value

Country (1 000 tonnes) Country (Million US$)

1 China PR 30 398 1 China PR 30 870

2 India 2 472 2 Japan 3 205

3 Viet Nam 1 199 3 India 2 936

4 Thailand 1 173 4 Chile 2 801

5 Indonesia 1 045 5 Viet Nam 2 444

6 Bangladesh 915 6 Indonesia 1 993

7 Japan 776 7 Norway 1 688

8 Chile 675 8 Thailand 1 587

9 Norway 638 9 Bangladesh 1 363

10 USA 606 10 Myanmar 1 231

Other 5 031 Other 13 231

Total 45 468 Total 63 356

Figure 5Trends in global aquaculture production

* Excluding aquatic plants Unit: 1 000 tonnes (quantity), million US$ (value)

Quantity Value

APFIC area

China

Rest of the world

0

20 000

40 000

60 000

80 000

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

APFIC (w/o China) China Rest of the world

APFIC area

China

Rest of the world

0

10 000

20 000

30 000

40 000

50 000

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

Figure 6Trends in aquaculture production of the Asia-Pacific region by environment

11

in China PR increased by 4.7 million tonnes(12.8 percent). In terms of tonnage other countriesthat showed large increases included Viet Nam(68 percent), Philippines (28 percent), Indonesia(28 percent), India (13 percent), Thailand(22.9 percent), Myanmar (110 percent) and KoreaRO (20 percent). Both inland culture andmariculture showed steady growth but the growthrate of the inland culture sector was more rapid(Figure 5).

China10 alone reported to have produced41.7 million tonnes or 71 percent of the worldaquaculture production in 2004 (including aquaticplants). This enormous scale of aquacultureproduction in China can be compared with thetotal fisheries production of Peru, the world’ssecond largest fisheries producer after China PR,which was 9.6 million tonnes in 2004 (includingboth capture and aquaculture). This was still lessthan one quarter of China PR aquacultureproduction alone (including aquatic plants). SinceChina PR is such a predominant producer, thescale of reported production can mask otherregional trends and China11 is treated separately inthis report.

If we exclude China, the Asia-Pacific region stillremains an important production area foraquaculture, exhibiting steady growth regardlessof the culture environment. In particular, inlandculture more than doubled its production from1 885 thousand tonnes in 1990 to 5 629 thousandtonnes in 2004. Such advances far exceed thegrowth of aquaculture in the rest of the world(Figure 6).

2004 (excluding aquatic plants and molluscs). Thetop species are all inland waters species, which aredominated by Chinese and Indian carps.

It is worth noting that the number of carnivorousspecies has increased during the past ten years.In marine waters, major cultured species aregenerally dominated by high-valued carnivorousspecies such as penaeid shrimp, jacks andsea breams. Production of crabs as well as theWhite leg shrimps have made significant advancesin recent years. White leg shrimp are now the topproduction species (Table 7).

2.3 Status and trends by sub-regions

FAO (2004)13 estimated that Asia accounted for87 percent of the total global number of personsengaged in fisheries and aquaculture production(total 38 million). These figures typically representfull time fisheries and those for whom fishing isa highly significant activity and full time aquaculturefarmers. The figures for people involved in fisheriesseasonally or as a supplemental part of a morediverse livelihood are difficult to estimate and areoften not.

South Asia – capture fisheries

The South Asian sub-region showed continuousgrowth from 1980-2002 but has tended to level offin recent years. It nearly doubled its captureproduction from 3.1 million tonnes in 1980 to5.8 million tonnes in 2004 (Figure 7). Most of theoverall growth resulted from production in marinewaters, but South Asia has the largest share ofinland capture production (30 percent of totalcapture fisheries production) among sub-regions inthe Asia-Pacific area. After remaining relativelystable during late 1970s and 1980s, inlandproduction grew rapidly from the early 1990s. Itreached the highest level of production at1.9 million tonnes in 2001 but showed a sharpdecrease in 2002 for the first time in the pastten years, but has started to increase again.

In comparison with top production species of othersub-regions, the combination of South Asianspecies is unique in the sense that freshwaterspecies (Cyprinids nei: 5th), diadromous species(Hilsa shad: 2nd), demersal species (Croakers/drums: 3rd), crustaceans (Natantian decapods: 4th)and pelagic species (Indian oil sardine: 1st) are allranked high in the list (Table 8).

10 This figure is for all China, but the massive scale ofChina PR’s aquaculture production challenges statisticalcollection and there are uncertainties regarding the quantitiesreported.11 See footnote 1.12 There is significant volume of aquaculture production

reported by large group of species, e.g. 3 394 thousandtonnes of fin fish production in 2002 were not identified atfamily, order or species level. Consequently, the species itemtotals could have underestimated the real production of theindividual species.

There has been little change in the top twentycultured species12 in the region between 1990 and

Top five cultured species in 2004 were all freshwatercarps (Silver carp, Rohu, Catla, Common carp andMrigal) and their aggregated production was2 635 thousand tonnes accounting for 77 percentof total aquaculture production of the sub-region.

13 FAO SOFIA, (Rome 2004).

12

Table 7Top twenty cultured species in Asia-Pacific region by quantity

Inland waters

1990 2004

1 Silver carp 1 416.6 1 Silver carp 3 839.1

2 Grass carp 1 042.0 2 Grass carp 3 831.4

3 Bighead carp 671.8 3 Common carp 3 140.0

4 Common carp 658.4 4 Bighead carp 2 097.2

5 Tilapia 282.8 5 Crucian carp 1 948.9

6 Rohu 244.7 6 Tilapia 1 238.1

7 Catla 235.3 7 Rohu 761.1

8 Crucian carp 215.6 8 Catla 615.6

9 Japanese eel 163.5 9 Mrigal carp 573.7

10 White amur bream 161.6 10 White amur bream 516.9

11 Mrigal carp 160.1 11 Chinese river crab 415.7

12 Clarias catfishes 61.1 12 Black carp 296.4

13 Barb 47.0 13 Amur catfish 246.9

14 Climbing perch 39.4 14 Snakehead 239.1

15 Black carp 37.9 15 Japanese eel 238.4

16 Milkfish 34.5 16 Oriental river prawn 213.1

17 Cyprinids nei 25.6 17 Giant river prawn 193.5

18 Gourami 24.9 18 Soft-shell turtle 170.1

19 Trouts 24.7 19 Mandarin fish 168.7

20 Giant river prawn 18.5 20 Swamp eel 137.5

Misc. freshwater fishes 776.8 Misc. freshwater fishers 1 767.3

Marine/brackish waters

1990 2004

1 Milkfish 399.6 1 White leg shrimp 1 111.2

2 Giant tiger prawn 289.7 2 Giant tiger prawn 698.7

3 Fleshy prawn 185.1 3 Milkfish 514.7

4 Japanese amberjack 161.6 4 Japanese amberjack 150.1

5 Silver seabream 52.0 5 Indo-Pacific swamp crab 117.5

6 Tilapia 39.2 6 Other penaeus shrimps 99.2

7 Banana prawn 32.8 7 Silver seabream 85.3

8 Metapenaeus shrimps 28.6 8 Banana prawn 83.2

9 Coho salmon 23.6 9 Japanese seabass 82.5

10 Other penaeus shrimps 21.0 10 Swimming crabs, etc. 68.4

11 Kuruma prawn 9.3 11 Large yellow croaker 67.4

12 Barramundi 7.9 12 Left-eye flounders 57.3

13 Mullets 7.9 13 Fleshy prawn 56.8

14 Bastard halibut 7.1 14 Groupers 54.5

15 Indian white prawn 6.7 15 Porgies, seabream 53.3

16 Japanese jack mackerel 5.9 16 Japanese sea cucumber 53.3

17 Indo-Pacific swamp crab 3.8 17 Kuruma prawn 47.5

18 Nile tilapia 3.8 18 Red drum 43.5

19 Puffers 2.9 19 Jellyfishes 39.4

20 Groupers 2.8 20 Bastard halibut 37.4

Misc. fishes 38.6 Misc. fishes 218.9

Misc. crustaceans 4.5 Misc. crustaceans 47.4

Unit: 1 000 tonnes

* Coloured cells indicate carnivorous species ** Excluding aquatic plants and molluscs

13

Figure 7Trends in capture productionof South Asia by environment

Figure 8Capture production of South Asiaby major species groups


0

2 000

4 000

6 000

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

Total production Inland Marine

0

400

800

1 200

1 600

2 000

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

Freshwater/diadromous fish Demersal marine fish

Pelagic marine fish Misc. marine fish

Crustaceans Cephalopods


Figure 9Trends in aquaculture productionof South Asia by major species groups

Figure 10Aquaculture production ofmajor species in South Asia

Unit: 1 000 tonnes

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

Rohu Catla

Mrigal carp Common carp

Silver carp Giant tiger prawn

Grass carp Penaeid shrimps

0

500

1 000

1 500

2 000

2 500

3 000

3 500

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

Freshwater fishes Crustaceans

Diadromous fishes Marine fishes

Molluscs Other

14

Among marine species, both pelagic fishes anddemersal fishes showed almost parallel increasingtrends with similar levels of production in 2004(1 195 thousand tonnes and 1 043 thousandtonnes, respectively). Freshwater fish anddiadromous fish have been the number oneproduction group for the last four decades (exceptin 1992) and achieved very rapid growth in the1990s. Crustacean production has been relativelystable and production levels of molluscs includingcephalopods in this area have been very low(Figure 8).

South Asia – aquaculture

South Asia’s production almost tripled from1 230 thousand tonnes in 1990 to 3 423 thousandtonnes in 2004. The majority of production comesfrom inland waters and hence the growth of thesector has been mostly due to increasingfreshwater culture (Figure 9).

Although Indian carps (Rohu, Catla and Mrigalcarp) have been the main group cultured in theregion, there have been notable increases in theproduction of introduced Chinese carps in recentyears. Silver carp production has also increasedalmost five-fold in two years (1999-2001) andbecame the top cultured species in 2001 for thefirst time. Since then, the production has declinedby half. On the other hand, common carpproduction recorded very rapid increases since2000 but shows a continuous increasing trend(Figure 10).

Marine crustacean production, mostly comprisedof Penaeid shrimp, has increased steadily andreached 178 thousand tonnes in 2004. In general,

the level of diversification of cultured species isrelatively low in this area and there has been verylimited or no reported marine finfish production.

Southeast Asia – capture fisheries

Production growth in Southeast Asia has also beenvery strong for the past four decades with marinecapture production increasing linearly through thisperiod to a level of 15 million tonnes in 2004 (totalcapture production).

Inland production appears to have levelled out andreached 1.5 million tonnes in 2004. Consideringthe rich freshwater resources in the area, it isthought that a figure of only 11 percent of totalproduction14 coming from inland waters is probablyan underestimate for this sub-region (Figure 11).

The main species groups are the pelagic marinefish group and marine fish nei group. Both keepgrowing strongly and are a major driving force ofthe overall production growth (Figure 12).Freshwater/diadromous fish, demersal fish,crustaceans and cephalopods showed similarincreasing trends, maintaining nearly the sameshare of production. The proportion of unidentifiedmarine fish (marine fish nei) is still notably high(31 percent of total production) in this sub-region.

Table 8South Asia capture fisheries production, topten species

Species Tonnes (1 000)

Indian oil sardine 309.4

Hilsa shad 256.0

Croakers, drums nei 254.2

Natantian decapods nei 240.0

Cyprinids nei 201.6

Giant tiger prawn 170.9

Skipjack tuna 161.3

Bombay-duck 152.7

Clupeoids nei 133.3

Sea catfishes nei 109.3

Marine fishes nei 1 080.2

Freshwater fishes nei 1 197.9

14 see footnote 8.

Table 9Southeast Asia capture fisheries production,top ten species


Scads nei 598.2

Indian mackerels nei 497.8

Sardinellas nei 408.3

Skipjack tuna 356.4


Carangids nei 283.3

Tuna-like fishes nei 271.7

Stolephorus anchovies 259.9

Frigate and bullet tunas 236.7

Threadfin breams nei 234.1

Marine fishes nei 4 625.9

Freshwater fishes nei 1 066.0

Eight of the top ten production species are marinepelagic fishes and the top three ranks aredominated by the small pelagic fish group (scads,Indian mackerels, and sardinellas) (Table 9). Thelarge pelagic fish group (skipjack tuna, carangids,

15

Production by quantity Production by value

Freshwater

fishes

40.7%

Diadromous

fishes

7.9%

Crustaceans

47.1%

Aquatic

plants 26.9%

Freshwater

fishes

36.7%

Diadromous

fishes

8.6%

Crustaceans

16.7%

Molluscs

10.5%

Freshwater fishes

Diadromous fishes

Marine fishes

Crustaceans

Molluscs

Aquatic plants

Other

Figure 11Trends in capture productionof Southeast Asia by environment

Figure 12Capture production of Southeast Asiaby major species groups


0

4 000

8 000

12 000

16 000

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000


0

1 000

2 000

3 000

4 000

5 000

6 000

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000





Figure 13Aquaculture production of Southeast Asia: proportion of major species groups

Figure 14Trends in aquaculture production of Southeast Asia by major species groups

Unit: 1 000 tonnes

0

600

1 200

1 800

2 400

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

Freshwater

fishes

Diadromous

fishes

Marine fishes

Crustaceans

Molluscs

Aquatic

plants

Others

16

tuna-like fishes, frigate and bullet tunas) alsofeature relatively high in the rankings.

Southeast Asia – aquaculture

Aquaculture production in Southeast Asia is verydiversified. In terms of value, highly pricedcrustaceans have an increased share of 47 percentof the total production, followed by freshwater fishat 41 percent (Figure 13).

Most species groups showed similar rapid growthtrends during the second period. However, trendsin the third period varied widely. The proportionof marine fish nei group declined sharply, whilst thecrustacean group continued to grow. During thisperiod, molluscs maintained the same productionlevel (Figure 16).

Largehead hairtail and Japanese anchovy catcheswere extremely high in 2004 with both speciesexceeding one million tonnes (Table 10). A secondgroup includes a variety of species group such assmall pelagic fish (scads and chub mackerel),large pelagic fish (Japanese Spanish mackerel),bentho-pelagic fish (silver pomfrets), demersal fish(golden threadfin bream), crustaceans (akiami pasteshrimp and gazami crab) and cephalopods.

Top ten cultured species in Southeast Asia(by quantity, excluding aquatic plants) were Gianttiger prawn, Milkfish, White leg shrimp, Nile tilapia,Green mussel, Common carp, Blood cockle, Rohu,Catfish and Banana prawn.

Freshwater finfish culture has increased from564 thousand tonnes in 1990 to 2 305 thousandtonnes in 2004, with an average annual incrementof 124 thousand tonnes. In the mariculturesub-sector, aquatic plants have shown a surprisinglystrong production growth. Crustaceans havebeen a major cultured species throughout thesub-region, but growth is slowing (Figure 14).

Zanzibar weed (Eucheuma cottonii) is still the mostwidely cultured aquatic plant in the region witha production of 1 070 thousand tonnes in 2004.Apart from aquatic plants, Giant tiger shrimp(Penaeus monodon) is maintaining the position oftop produced species, although very recently themassive increase in production of White leg shrimp(P. vannamei) is starting to challenge this position.

China – capture fisheries

Three periods that show distinct trends (Figure 15)can be seen in the Chinese statistics. The firstperiod, 1950 to 1985, has relatively low rates ofgrowth, and all species groups exhibited verysimilar patterns, albeit with some annualfluctuations. In the second period, 1986 to 1998,China reported very rapid and substantial growthin production in almost all types of capturefisheries. Between 1993 and 1997, annualincrements of total production always exceededone million tonnes (the highest annual incrementwas 1.7 million tonnes in 1995). Subsequent to thisamazing period, the third period started with theintroduction of the zero growth policy in 1998; totalproduction started to decline for the first time inalmost twenty years with the degree of declinehigher in marine production than in inlandproduction.

Table 10China capture fisheries production, top tenspecies


Largehead hairtail 1 411.6

Japanese anchovy 1 103.4

Akiami paste shrimp 673.5

Scads nei 624.6

Chub mackerel 511.7


Japanese Spanish mackerel 391.8

Silver pomfrets nei 386.5

Gazami crab 340.9

Croakers, drums nei 334.8

Notable differences in the Chinese productionfigures compared with other sub-regions include:

� Remarkably high proportion of crustaceans in(15.3 percent in 2004) compared to those ofother sub-regions. Proportions of crustaceansin Southeast Asia, South Asia and other Asiawere 5.8 percent, 9.4 percent and 3.8 percentrespectively.

� Although diminishing, a large quantity ofproduction is reported as unidentified largegroupings that far exceed that of the othersub-regions. Total quantity reported underthese groups was 5.5 million tonnes in 2004representing 30.0 percent of the Chinese totalcapture production (Table 11).

� A much smaller amount of small pelagic fishin the catch compared with other sub-regions,especially South Asia.

17

Figure 15Trends in capture production of Chinaby environment

Figure 16Capture production of Chinaby major species groups


0

5 000

10 000

15 000

20 000

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000


0

1 000

2 000

3 000

4 000

5 000

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000





Figure 17Trends in aquaculture production of China by environment

Unit: 1 000 tonnes

Marine watersInland waters

Aquatic plant

Molluscs

0

6 000

12 000

18 000

24 000

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

Aquatic plants Molluscs Crustaceans Marine fishes Diadromous fishes Freshwater fishes

Freshwater fishes

0

5 000

10 000

15 000

20 000

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

Figure 18Trends in top eight cultured speciesin China (aquatic plants and molluscs)

Figure 19Trends in major cultured carnivorousspecies production in China

Unit: 1 000 tonnes

0

500

1 000

1 500

2 000

2 500

3 000

3 500

4 000

4 500

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

Japanese kelp Pacific cupped oyster

Grass carp Silver carp

Wakame Aquatic plants nei

Japanese carpet shell Common carp

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

Snakehead Japanese eel

Marine fishes nei Fleshy prawn

Giant river prawn Chinese river crab

Mandarin fish Marine crabs nei

18

� Consistently high catch of some major speciessuch as the largehead hairtail that hasn’tshown any signs of decreasing.

Detailed statistics for the Xianshan County in theZhejiang Province of China PR have been madeavailable through sample surveys carried out in2002/03. The total catch, based on the surveydata, was 324 thousand tonnes from June 2002 toMay 2003, of which 78 percent came from pairtrawling, 8 percent from shrimp beam trawling,7 percent from drift gill nets, 6 percent from ottertrawling, 1 percent from crab-cage fishing and0.35 percent from purse seining.

A comparison with official statistics for the countyshowed that for some gears, such as pair trawlsand otter trawls, the official statistics were over-estimated by about 20 percent but for other gearsincluding beam trawls, crab-cage fishing and purseseine, the official statistics were under-reported.The total sample survey estimate for 6 gears was92 percent of the total official figures for all gearsthe county.

Break down by gear and species showed theextremely large catch taken by pair trawlers in thisarea of China PR (250 thousand tonnes from June2002 to May 2003). Otter trawls, shrimp beamtrawls and drift gillnets also all recorded catchesin excess of 20 thousand tonnes for the samesample period. The dominance of some speciessuch as largehead hairtail and butterfish from pairtrawls is also very marked, (96 thousand tonnesand 27.5 thousand tonnes, respectively). Pairtrawlers also caught large quantities of juvenileSpanish mackerel, and chub mackerel, with a verylarge number of other species making up the restof the catch.

Large yellow croaker fetched the highest marketprice, but because largehead hairtail was caughtin such large quantities and fetched a reasonableprice, this was the most valuable species(33 percent of the total value of the fishery).

The study also identified that about 27 percent ofthe catch was reported as unsorted fish by theskipper of the vessel (low value/trash species).About 16 percent of this was for humanconsumption and 11 percent for aquaculturefeed. Both categories contained, on average,about twenty species, but the species compositiondiffered between different vessels and differenttrips. Otter trawls were found to be targetingunsorted species during the spring period.

China – aquaculture

As reported above, China’s aquaculture productionhas now reached 41.7 million tonnes or 70 percentof the world aquaculture production in 2004(including aquatic plants). Growth in inland culturehas continued, mainly from increased productionof finfish culture, which is being achieved throughthe intensification of existing systems rather thanany significant increase in production area. Growthin production from marine waters has been drivenby molluscs and aquatic plants (Figure 17).

The production of most cultured species continuedto increase. However, there are a number ofspecies worth highlighting, as follows:

Japanese kelp (Laminaria japonica): its productiongrowth is remarkable; increasing from 1 222thousand tonnes in 1990 to 4 208 thousand tonnesin 2002 with a minor decline to 4 006 thousandtonnes in 2004.

Miscellaneous aquatic plants: this massivevolume of aquatic plants is not reported at thespecies level. However, production jumped from196 thousand tonnes in 1990 to 3 931 thousandtonnes in 2002. China PR has improved thereporting at species level since 2003 and thefigure has decreased to 2 538 thousand tonnesin 2004. As a result of the improved reportingby China PR, Wakame (Undaria pinnatifida) hasbecome the second largest cultured plant witha total of 2 196 thousand tonnes in 2004.

Pacific cupped oyster: this is another culturedspecies that has made outstanding growth;increasing from 503 thousand tonnes in 1990 upto 3 751 thousand tonnes in 2004. Molluscproduction is also difficult to intensify and

Table 11Unidentified capture production in China(1 000 tonnes)

Species group 2002 2004

Marine fishes nei 3 596 2 605

Marine molluscs nei 1 377 849

Marine crustaceans nei 1 215 0

Freshwater fishes nei 924 1 724

Freshwater molluscs nei 773 343

Freshwater crustaceans nei 551 0

Total of “nei” groups 8 435 5 523

Total capture production 17 767 17 970

% contribution of “nei” groups 47% 30%

19

increased production suggests developments ofnew production areas as in the case of aquaticplants (Figure 18).

Carnivorous species: Rapid growth in productionof high value carnivorous species such as mandarinfish, Chinese river crab and marine finfish startedto occur since 1995. Many of the carnivorousspecies show very similar patterns of growth inproduction (Figure 19).

Other Asia – capture fisheries

Total production increased towards its peakproduction of 14.9 million tonnes in 1986, andthereafter decreased steadily (Figure 20).

During the late 1960s to early 1970s, demersal fishbecame the most important production group witha very rapid growth rate, achieving a three-foldincrease in fifteen years (Figure 21). It started todecline, however, after the peak production of fivemillion tonnes in 1974, gradually at first, but witha sharp decline after 1976. The current level ofdemersal fish production is now as low as in theearly 1950s. This reduction was compensated forby increased production of marine pelagic fish until1988, but then a similar decline to that of demersalfish production occurred. Current production levelshave dropped to 3 million tonnes, similar to thoseof the early 1970s.

In terms of major production species, pelagicspecies predominate in this area. It is also notablethat there is high production of cephalopods(Japanese flying squid) and molluscs (Yessoscallop) (Table 12).

Aquatic plants continue to be a predominant partof aquaculture in other Asia, particularly in EastAsian States. They account for 52 percent oftotal production. This is followed by molluscs(29 percent) and marine finfish (11 percent).However, the high economic value of marinefinfish makes this species group the largestcontributor in terms of value, constituting42 percent of total production value (Figure 22).

Aquaculture production in this region has been verystable; most of the major species groups havebeen maintained at the current level of productionfor the last ten years. The only exception to thisis aquatic plant production, which peaked in 1993at 2.3 million tonnes and then decreased by almost35 percent to 1.5 million tonnes in 2004 (Figure 23).

It is notable that the percentage of carnivorous fishto total fish production is very high in thissub-region (82 percent in 2004) compared withSouth Asia, Southeast Asia and China, which allhave levels below 10 percent.

Oceania – capture fisheries

Oceania’s capture production also consists mainlyof fish taken from marine waters, but unlike otherAsia it has continued to increase (Figure 24).Capture fisheries are often subsistence fisheriesin many small island States and production maynot be well represented in the official statistics.General trends in production are basicallydetermined by a few larger States such as Australiaand New Zealand with well established commercialfisheries sectors, with the exception of offshorepelagic fisheries. Rapid growth of pelagic marinefish production from the late 1990’s has mainlycome from Skipjack tuna in Papua New Guinea(Figure 25). Commercial offshore production hasalso increased in many small island States andcontributed to the increase in total production.

Many of the top ten species produced from capturefisheries in Oceania (Table 13) are mainly from thetemperate waters of New Zealand and Australia.

Oceania – aquaculture

Aquaculture production from the small islandStates is relatively limited. The aggregatedproduction of all island States was 19 585 tonnesin 2002 (less than one percent of aquacultureproduction in the Asia-Pacific region) and seemsto have declined even further to 7 723 tonnes in2004.

Table 12Other Asia capture fisheries production, top tenspecies


Japanese anchovy 692.4

Chub mackerel 523.7

Skipjack tuna 489.0

Japanese flying squid 447.4

Alaska pollock 319.4

Yesso scallop 313.8

Japanese jack mackerel 279.8

Chum salmon 261.6

Pacific saury 230.0

Okhotsk atka mackerel 179.3

Marine fishes nei 428.6

Marine crustaceans nei 63.6

20


0

5 000

10 000

15 000

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000


0

2 000

4 000

6 000

8 000

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000





Figure 20Trends in capture productionof other Asia by environment

Figure 21Capture production of other Asiaby major species groups

Figure 22Aquaculture production in other Asia: proportion of major species groups

11.0% 41.7%

11.2%

16.2%

29.0%

24.9%

52.2%

Value

Quantity

Freshwater fishes

Diadromous fishes

Marine fishes

Crustaceans

Molluscs

Aquatic plants

Others

Figure 23Trends in aquaculture production of other Asia by major species groups

Unit: 1 000 tonnes

0

500

1 000

1 500

2 000

2 500

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

Freshwater

fishes

Diadromous

fishes

Marine

fishes

Crustaceans

Molluscs

Aquatic

plants

21

Figure 25Capture production of Oceania by major species groups


0

200

400

600

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 200





Figure 24Trends in capture production of Oceania by environment


0

500

1 000

1 500

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000


22

Seaweed, clams, penaeid shrimp, tilapia andmilkfish are the main cultured groups. In terms ofvalue, two commodities from three States dominatethe value of commercial aquaculture production inregion. They are cultured black pearl from FrenchPolynesia and the Cook Islands and shrimp fromNew Caledonia.

Table 13Oceania capture fisheries production, top tenspecies


Skipjack tuna 333.2

Blue grenadier 143.3

Wellington flying squid 84.4

Yellowfin tuna 62.3

Jack and horse mackerels 43.2

Clupeoids nei 37.0

Antarctic krill 29.5

Albacore 28.2

Snoek 22.6

Southern blue whiting 21.6

Marine fishes nei 76.1

Live reef fish, aquarium fish and pearls bringsignificant income to some Pacific Islands,although relatively low in quantity. Although thetarget species are mostly caught from the wild,there is an increasing desire for culture-basedsources. Giant clam culture for the ornamentaltrade is widespread throughout the region andthe total export is probably in the range of30 000-50 000 pieces/annum. The Pacific is alsoa major supplier of “live rock” (rock encrusted withcoralline algae) with approximately 50 000 piecesof live rock currently being cultured in the Fiji.

Eucheuma cottonii seaweed (Zanzibar weed)culture is well established in the Kiribati atolls andis being rejuvenated in the Solomon Islands andFiji.

Interest in inland freshwater aquaculture is growing,particularly amongst the larger Melanesian Statessuch as Fiji and Papua New Guinea. At presentthe most commonly farmed species are tilapia,common carp and Macrobrachium prawns.

New Zealand and Australia have shown a steadygrowth in aquaculture production throughincreased production of finfish species. Majorcultured species of these States were marinemolluscs, salmonids and tunas.

23

3. Status of resources

The general consensus is that most of the fisheries resources in the APFIC region, especially in Asia, areshowing signs of overexploitation and severe degradation. This is particularly evident in the inshore coastalareas where (i) stock assessments of major species, (ii) historic research surveys, (iii) analyses of ecosystemchanges and (iv) perceptions of fishers all show the same trends. The evidence is so overwhelming thatany call to delay management action until more scientific assessments are available must be seen asirresponsible.

In inland waters, most fisheries are small-scale activities where the catch per capita is relatively small andused mainly for subsistence purposes. The lack of accurate reporting of these small-scale fisheries makesit difficult to describe their status, but it is generally felt that they are under considerable pressure fromloss and degradation of habitat as well as overfishing.

management decision-making. In cases whereit is possible to assess the status of individualstocks, current catch levels often exceed MaximumSustainable Yield (MSY) estimates and many ofthese stocks are designated as over-fished.

In many other countries, single species stockassessments are not conducted regularly buta common practice is to conduct “multi-species”assessments from time to time using aggregatedcatch and effort data in simple production andsimilar models. The reliability of these types ofassessments is known to be very low and thedegree of uncertainty very high (the basicassumption that the catch per unit effort (CPUE) isa good indicator of fish relative abundance is oftennot met). The results are not in a form that can beused regularly in management but are often usedto set targets for future fishing capacity and totalyields. In many cases, the uncertainty of theseassessments has not been taken into account andthe predictions have proved to be too optimistic,often accelerating the decline in the resources.

3.3 Evidence from historic trawl surveys

Biomass analyses

The results of the WorldFish Center (WorldFish)study on scientific trawl surveys (Trawlbase)1 wasreported in the previous APFIC “Status andpotential of fisheries and aquaculture in Asiaand the Pacific”. These analyses were availableon the status of fisheries from eight APFICStates (Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Malaysia,

Marine waters

3.1 Assessing the status of fisheryresources

In many of the seas of the APFIC region, traditionalmethods of assessing the status of fisheriesresources, using scientific stock assessments,setting of reference points and monitoringperformance against these reference points,is not really practical. This is due, firstly, tothe complexity of the tropical systems thatpredominate in the region – the multi-species/multi-gear nature of the fisheries and, secondly,the lack of capacity to carry out the necessaryassessments and/or monitoring, especially inareas where fish are landed in multiple smalllanding sites or along the beaches.

Reporting of total production also often maskswhat is actually happening in the fishery, andshould not be used as an indicator of resourcestatus.

In this analysis we look at the evidence on thestatus of marine resources based on four methods:

• stock assessment of major species;

• historic research surveys;

• ecosystem changes; and

• perception of fishers.

3.2 Evidence from stock assessments

Regular stock assessments are conducted in someof the more developed countries of the region(Table 14). However, even in these countries thenumber of species regularly assessed is oftenrelatively low. In the case of Japan and Malaysiathese assessments are used in day-to-day fisheriesmanagement, but in the other countries thescientific results are only partially integrated into

1 Silvestre, G.T., Garces, L.R., Stobutzki, I., Ahmed,M., Santos, R.A.V., Luna, C.Z., Lachica-Alino, L., Christensen,V., Pauly, D. & Munro (eds.) (2003). Assessment, managementand future directions for coastal fisheries in Asian States.WorldFish Center Conference Proceedings 67, 1 120 pp.

24

Table 14Summary of stock assessments in selected APFIC countries

RegularNumber of

Country stockspecies

Resource surveys Reference points Used in managementassessment

China PR Yes 8 Yes* MSY, MCY etc. Yes (Selected species)

India Yes ~50 Yes MSY Yes (partial)

Indonesia No Multi-species** Yes* Generic MSY Yes (partial)

Japan Yes Main species** Yes MSY, MEY etc. Yes

Korea RO Yes 9 Yes (Yellow Sea) MSY, MEY etc. Yes (partial)

Philippines No Multi-species** Yes Generic MSY No

Malaysia Yes Main species** Yes MSY, MEY etc. Yes

Myanmar No Multi-species** Yes* Generic MSY No

Thailand No Multi-species** Yes Generic MSY No

Viet Nam No Multi-species** Yes* Generic MSY No

* Resources surveys not regular.

** “Multi-species” assessments based on aggregated catch and effort data.

Figure 26Trawl surveys in the Asian regionFrom Silvestre, G.T., Garces, L.R., Stobutzki, I., Ahmed, M., Santos, R.A.V., Luna, C.Z.and Zhou, W. (2003). South and Southeast Asian coastal fisheries: Their status anddirections for improved management. Conference Synopsis and recommendations,p. 1-40 in Silvestre, G.T., Garces, L.R., Stobutzki, I., Ahmed, M., Santos, R.A.V., Luna,C.Z., Lachica-Alino, L., Christensen, V., Pauly, D. and Munro (eds.) Assessment,Management and Future Directions for Coastal Fisheries in Asian Countries. WorldFishCenter Conference Proceedings 67, 1 120 pp.

25

the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Viet Nam),based on trawl survey data spanning the period1920 to the present. The surveys covered a widearea of the Asian sub-region (Figure 26).Unfortunately, funding for this project has finishedand there is no update on earlier findings. Thereare also other very comprehensive survey dataavailable for other areas, especially those carriedout by the Fishery Survey if India (FSI) that startedin 1946 and currently deploys more than 12 vesselsalong the Indian coast and the Andaman andNicobah Islands that could be included in futureanalyses.

However, despite the fact that the work is noton-going, we consider these WorldFish analysesbased on scientific surveys the most convincingevidence that is available on the status of resourcesin trawled areas in the Asian sub-region and worthreiterating.

The analyses of the trawl surveys showedconsiderable degradation and overfishing ofcoastal stocks. In surveys that were carried outfor periods greater than 25 years, the amount offish (measured as tonnes/km2) had declined tobetween 6 and 33 percent of the original earliervalue. The amount of fish available to today’sfishers had declined in all countries, some as muchas 40 percent in five years. The most dramaticdeclines were in the Gulf of Thailand and the EastCoast of Malaysia. Two examples, one for the Gulfof Thailand and one for Manila Bay are given inFigure 27.

The Trawlbase study also enabled an estimationof the exploitation rate for 427 stocks in the region.With the exception of the coast of BruneiDarussalam, where fishing pressure is less intense,the majority of stocks were being fished at levelsabove the recommended optimum range.

The surveys also demonstrated that the abundanceof larger, more valuable species (e.g. groupers,snappers, sharks and rays) higher up in the foodchain have declined, while smaller species lowerin the food chain (e.g. triggerfish, cardinal fish andsquids/octopus) have increased to relativeabundance. In the Gulf of Thailand trawl surveycatch in the 1960s, the top ten species (or speciesgroups) were made up of rays, bream, goatfish withsome squid, lizard fish and snapper (Figure 28).By contrast, in the mid-1990s less desirable ponyfish, squid, barracuda, and lizard fish had becomemuch more prevalent. This “fishing down the foodchain” appeared to be a common phenomenon inmany of the trawl survey data.

Socio-economic assessments

WorldFish also carried out some in-depth socio-economic assessments of the eight participatingStates. This allowed an assessment of theimportance of coastal fisheries in terms of earnings,employment, trade and nutrition and theircontribution to the economy. The profitability offishing operations in Malaysia, Thailand andViet Nam was studied, and broken down intoseveral sub-sectors.

In general, fishing is still a profitable enterprise inall of these three States, particularly for the ownersof industrial fishing vessels. Owners of industrialcraft and gear earn large profits (up to 30 percentper year) while artisanal, small-scale fishers oftenhave an extremely marginal livelihood, althoughbenefits are not evenly distributed. Unfortunately,profits from industrial fishing do not flow into therural communities as it employs few crew andprovides little opportunity for unemployed orunder-employed small-scale fishers.

The loss in revenue and profits associated withoverfishing and degraded resources weredemonstrated using the Gulf of Thailand as anexample (Table 15). Based on 1995-96 data, largerent dissipation and excess capacity (in both labourand capital) can be clearly seen. Similar analyseshave been done for the Philippines and otherareas in the past. More of these sorts of analysesshould be carried out to guide future policydecision-making.

3.4 Evidence from Large MarineEcosystems (LMEs)

APFIC’s Large Marine Ecosystems

To date, 63 LMEs have been described worldwidewith twenty of these being in the APFIC region.

Much of the information used below hasbeen taken from the NOAA website, whichacknowledges sources of information and has anextensive reference list,2 as well as an analysis ofthe FAO catch database as modified by theUniversity of British Columbia3 (“Sea around us”project).

The Asia-Pacific region is characterized byconsiderable diversity in LMEs in terms of theirfisheries and driving forces (Table 16). The table

2 Large Ecosystems of the World:http://www.edc.uri.edu/lme/

3 UBC large Marine ecosystems:http://www.seaaroundus.org/lme/lme.aspx

26

1966 1995

Rays

Threadfin

bream

GoatfishBream spp.

Indian squid

Tachsuridae

Rays Threadfin bream Goatfish

Bream spp. Indian squid Tachsuridae

Bigeye Lizard fish Snapper

Scad

Splendid Pony

fish

Indian squid

BarracudaPugnose pony

fish

Bream

Lizard fish

Splendid Pony fish Indian squidBarracuda Pugnose pony fishBream Lizard fishGoat fish Rabbit fishChinese squid Orange fin pony fish

Table 15Comparison of catch, revenues, costs and profits at different levels of fishing effort (MSY = maximumsustainable yield; MEY = maximum economic yield). From same source as Figure 26

State of Effort Catch Revenue Costs Profitfishery (Std. hr x 106) (Tonnes x 103) (Baht x 106) (Baht x 106) (Baht x 106)

MSY 28.57 985 6 578 1 992 4 586

MEY 21.75 952 6 359 1 517 4 842

Open access 62.70 654 4 372 4 372 0

Actual (1995) 56.88 728 4 862 3 966 896

1947 1952 1957 1962 1967 1972 1977 1982 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985YEARYEAR

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

BIOMASS DECLINE IN MANILA BAY BIOMASS DECLINE IN THE GULF OF THAILAND

BIO

MA

SS

( x

10

t)6

BIO

MA

SS

( x

10

t)6

Figure 27Declines in the abundance of fish in (i) Manila Bay and (ii) Gulf of Thailand as measured by trawlsurveys. From same source as Figure 26

Figure 28Changes in the composition of the top ten species taken from trawl survey catches in the Gulfof Thailand between 1966 and 1995. Data from same source as Figure 26

27

has excluded four LMEs from Australia as well asthe large Western and Central Pacific. The fourAustralian LMEs were excluded as their catcheswere very small and not important to the analysis.In the case of Western and Central Pacific, thisarea was not included as an LME on the “Seaaround us” website.

In terms of the total recorded catch since 1950, themost productive LMEs are the East China Sea,the Kuroshio Current and the South China Sea.Following closely behind are the Yellow Sea, theSea of Japan, the Bay of Bengal and the NWPacific high seas area.

The Indonesian Sea, the Gulf of Thailand and theSulu-Celebes Seas are clustered in another group,followed by the much smaller catches in NewZealand and Australia LMEs.

All LMEs have a mixture of pelagic and demersalspecies, although pelagics dominate in mostLMEs, especially in the Kuroshio Current, Seaof Japan, Yellow Sea, East China Sea, SouthChina Sea, Arabian Sea, Sulu-Celebes Sea, andIndonesian Sea.

In the Kuroshio Current, Sea of Japan, Yellow Sea,East China Sea and South China Sea, the majorspecies are the Japanese pilchard (Sardinopssagax – melanostictus), chub mackerel (Scomberjaponicus) and the largehead hairtail (Triciuruslepturus).

In the Bay of Bengal, Arabian Gulf, Sulu-CelebesSeas, Indonesian Sea and NW Australia, anchovies(Stolephorus spp. and Engraulidae) form a largepart of the catch with other small pelagic speciessuch as the sardine (Sardinella spp.) common insome areas. Pacific saury (Colobis saira) hasformed a large part of the catch in the high seasof the NW Pacific.

Exceptions to this pattern are the heavily trawledareas of the Gulf of Thailand and Northern Australiawhere more demersals, threadfin breams andshrimps, respectively, are taken, although even inthese areas catches of anchovies are almost ashigh as the demersal catches.

In terms of total catch, bottom trawling takes thelargest proportion of the catch in 12 out of the 15LMEs included in Table 16. This includes pairtrawling that, in many areas of the region, operateshigh-lift nets that catch significant quantities ofbentho-pelagic species, such as the largeheadhairtail and pelagic species such as Japanese

anchovy. As expected from the nature of thesefisheries, catches from mid-water trawls and purseseines are also large, especially in the more pelagicLMEs.

These statistics, however, tend to mask theimportance of the small-scale fisheries to theseLMEs, and although no firm data are availablethey are known to constitute a large proportion ofthe catch from many areas.

Many LMEs are shared by several countries. Forexample, the Bay of Bengal is bordered byeight countries that all contribute to its catch.Table 16 shows the distribution of catch bycountries as estimated by reported landingsand distributed on the basis of known accessagreements in other country’s EEZ. There aresome obvious discrepancies in this analysis (e.g.high catch by Indonesia in Southeast Australia), butit does demonstrate the multi-national nature of thesector and the many shared fish stocks that aretaken by several countries in each LME.

Catch trends in selected Large MarineEcosystems

Based on their overall trends in catches, the LMEsof the APFIC region were categorized into fourmajor groups in the 2004 “Status and potential offisheries in Asia and the Pacific”:

i. Offshore deepwater systems dominated bypelagic fishes (e.g. Kuroshio Current and NWPacific);

ii. Heavily fished coastal systems that displaysequential depletion of species groupscharacteristic of “fishing down the food chain”(e.g. Yellow Sea, Gulf of Thailand and NWAustralia);

iii. Coastal systems that are still showingincreasing reported catches in all speciesgroups (e.g. Bay of Bengal and South ChinaSea); and

iv. Fisheries managed under tight access rightcontrols (e.g. Southeast Australia and NewZealand Shelf).

One example of each of these categories isanalysed in some detail below.

i) Offshore deepwater pelagic systems

Kuroshio Current

The catch in the Kuroshio Current showed a sharppeak in the mid-1980s with catches of 2.9 milliontonnes. Since then there has been a dramatic

28

Tab

le 1

6T

he

larg

e m

arin

e ec

osy

stem

s o

f th

e A

sia-

Pac

ific

(exc

lud

ing

W A

ust

ralia

, E A

ust

ralia

, NE

Au

stra

lia a

nd

SW

Au

stra

lia)

LM

EF

ish

ery

Gea

rC

ou

ntr

y fi

shin

gTr

end

sD

rivi

ng

Fo

rce(

s)

Sea

of

Jap

anM

ixed

Bo

tto

m t

raw

l (29

%)

Jap

an (5

4%)

Dem

ersa

ls p

eake

d in

197

0sC

limat

eLa

rge

ben

tho

-pel

agic

s (2

8%)

Mid

-wat

er t

raw

l (28

%)

Chi

na (1

5%)

Sm

all p

elag

ics

pea

ked

in m

id-1

980s

Fis

hing

Med

ium

pel

agic

s (2

4%)

Pur

se s

eine

s (1

7%)

Rus

sian

Fed

. (1

2%)

Larg

e b

enth

o-p

elag

ics

pea

ked

in la

te 1

990s

Hab

itat

Sm

all p

elag

ics

(12%

)K

ore

a D

PR

(11%

)R

ecen

t in

crea

se in

sq

uid

, la

rge

pel

agic

s,P

ol lu

tion

lob

ster

s an

d c

rab

s.

Kur

osh

io C

urre

ntM

ixed

Bo

tto

m t

raw

l (33

%)

Jap

an (8

1%)

Sm

all p

elag

ics

and

pel

agic

s p

eake

d in

Clim

ate

Sm

all p

elag

ics

(26%

)P

urse

sei

nes

(25%

)C

hina

(11%

)m

id-1

980s

Med

ium

pel

agic

s (2

6%)

Mid

-wat

er t

raw

l (13

%)

Ko

rea

RO

(6%

)C

atch

es in

198

0s d

om

inat

ed b

y S

out

hM

ediu

m d

emer

sals

(15%

)A

mer

ican

pi lc

hard

Rec

ent

low

er c

atch

es d

om

inat

ed b

yJa

pan

ese

anch

ovy

Yello

w S

eaM

ixed

Drif

tnet

s (2

6%)

Chi

na (7

2%)

Med

ium

pel

agic

s d

om

inat

ing

with

a p

eak

Clim

ate

Med

ium

pel

agic

s (1

8%)

Bo

tto

m t

raw

lers

(25%

)Ja

pan

(11%

)in

198

0F

ishi

ngS

hrim

ps

(14%

)B

agne

ts (1

7%)

Ko

rea

RO

(11%

)S

mal

l pel

agic

s an

d lo

bst

ers,

cra

bs

star

ted

Hab

itat

Cep

halo

po

ds

(13%

)an

incr

ease

in e

arly

90s

but

hav

e sh

ow

edP

ollu

tion

a re

cent

sha

rp d

ecre

ase.

Rec

ent

incr

ease

shri

mp

s

Eas

t C

hina

Sea

Mix

edB

ott

om

tra

wls

(34%

)C

hina

(68%

)S

mal

l pel

agic

s p

eake

d in

late

199

0sF

ishi

ngM

ediu

m b

enth

o-p

elag

ics

(15%

)B

agne

ts (1

4%)

Jap

an (2

0%)

Sm

all d

emer

sals

pea

ked

in la

te 1

960s

Po

llutio

nS

mal

l pel

agic

s (1

4%)

Mid

-wat

er t

raw

ls (9

%)

Ko

rea

RO

(8%

)an

d a

gai

n in

late

199

0sH

abita

tM

ediu

m p

elag

ics

(14%

)P

urse

sei

nes

(9%

)S

hrim

p in

crea

sing

Clim

ate

Med

ium

dem

ersa

ls (1

3%)

So

uth

Chi

na S

eaM

ixed

Bo

tto

m t

raw

ls (3

7%)

Chi

na (3

9%)

Incr

easi

ng t

rend

s in

all

gro

ups

up u

ntil

Fis

hing

Med

ium

pel

agic

s (1

3%)

Gill

nets

(8%

)V

iet

Nam

(21%

)la

te 1

990s

Po

llutio

nM

ediu

m d

emer

sals

(12%

)M

id-w

ater

tra

wls

(7%

)In

do

nesi

a (1

3%)

Pel

agic

s st

ill in

crea

sing

Hab

itat

Sm

all p

elag

ics

(11%

)P

urse

sei

nes

(7%

)T

haila

nd (9

%)

Sm

all d

emer

sals

(10%

)

Bay

of

Ben

gal

Mix

edB

ott

om

tra

wls

(34%

)M

yanm

ar (2

6%)

All

gro

ups

incr

easi

ngF

ishi

ngS

mal

l dem

ersa

ls (2

5%)

Gill

nets

(14%

)In

dia

(22%

)P

ollu

tion

Med

ium

pel

agic

s (2

1%)

Mid

-wat

er t

raw

ls (1

4%)

Tha

iland

(13%

)H

abita

tM

ediu

m d

emer

sals

(17%

)M

alay

sia

(13%

)

29

Tab

le 1

6 (c

on

tin

ued

)

LM

EF

ish

ery

Gea

rC

ou

ntr

y fi

shin

gTr

end

sD

rivi

ng

Fo

rce(

s)

Gul

f o

f T

haila

ndM

ixed

Bo

tto

m t

raw

ls (3

5%)

Tha

iland

(38%

)D

emer

sals

pea

ked

in e

arly

197

0s f

ollo

wed

Fis

hing

Sm

all d

emer

sals

(21%

)G

il lne

ts (1

1%)

Vie

t N

am (3

6%)

by

a su

dd

en d

eclin

e d

urin

g 1

980s

and

199

0sP

ollu

tion

Med

ium

pel

agic

s (2

0%)

Pur

se s

eine

s (9

%)

Mal

aysi

a (2

0%)

Pel

agic

s p

eake

d in

ear

ly 1

970s

Hab

itat

Med

ium

ree

f as

soc.

fis

h (1

7%)

Mid

-wat

er t

raw

ls (8

%)

Cam

bo

dia

(6%

)S

mal

l pel

agic

s flu

ctua

ting

ann

ually

Pel

agic

s p

eake

d in

ear

ly 1

970s

Ara

bia

n S

eaM

ixed

Bo

tto

m t

raw

ls (3

5%)

Ind

ia (6

2%)

Pel

agic

s st

able

sin

ce m

id-1

980s

but

Fis

hing

Med

ium

dem

ersa

ls (2

0%)

Mid

-wat

er t

raw

ls (1

2%)

Pak

ista

n (1

1%)

incr

easi

ng r

ecen

tlyP

ol lu

tion

Sm

all p

elag

ics

(17%

)D

riftn

ets

(11%

)Ir

an (1

0%)

Sm

all d

emer

sals

and

shr

imp

incr

easi

ng u

nti l

Hab

itat

Sm

all d

emer

sals

(12%

)G

il lne

ts (7

%)

Ben

tho

-pel

agic

s st

able

rec

ently

Larg

e p

elag

ics

(11%

)

Sul

u-C

eleb

es S

eaM

ixed

Bo

tto

m t

raw

l (23

%)

Phi

l ipp

ines

(78%

)S

mal

l pel

agic

s in

crea

sing

with

ann

ual

Fis

hing

Med

ium

pel

agic

s (4

5%)

Pur

se s

eine

s (1

6%)

Ind

one

sia

(13%

)flu

ctua

tions

Po

llutio

nS

mal

l dem

ersa

ls (1

2%)

Bo

at s

eine

s (1

4%)

Mal

aysi

a (6

%)

Pel

agic

s p

eake

d in

late

198

0sH

abita

tM

ediu

m r

eef

asso

c. f

ish

(10%

)La

rge

dem

ersa

ls p

eake

d in

late

195

0sS

mal

l pel

agic

s (9

%)

Dem

ersa

ls p

eake

d in

197

0s a

nd la

te 1

990s

Larg

e p

elag

ics

stab

le s

ince

ear

ly 1

990s

Ind

one

sian

Sea

Mix

edB

ott

om

tra

wls

(26%

)In

do

nesi

a (7

1%)

Pel

agic

s p

eake

d in

late

198

0s b

ut s

tab

leF

ishi

ngM

ediu

m p

elag

ics

(26%

)P

urse

sei

nes

(20%

)T

haila

nd (2

5%)

sinc

e ea

rly 1

990s

Po

llutio

nM

ediu

m r

eef

asso

c. f

ish

(12%

)M

id-w

ater

tra

wls

(13%

)P

hilip

pin

es (2

%)

Sm

all p

elag

ics

still

incr

easi

ngH

abita

tS

mal

l pel

agic

s (1

2%)

Gill

nets

(11%

)K

ore

a R

O (2

%)

Larg

e p

elag

ics

sho

wed

rap

id g

row

th d

urin

gM

ediu

m d

emer

sals

(11%

)19

90s

but

dec

lined

ove

r re

cent

yea

rsD

emer

sals

pea

ked

late

199

0s

Insu

lar

Pac

ific

Mix

edP

urse

sei

nes

(37%

)U

SA

(85%

)S

mal

l pel

agic

s cy

clic

al p

eaki

ng in

late

195

0sC

limat

eH

awai

ien

Med

ium

pel

agic

s (3

3%)

Ho

oke

s o

r g

org

es (1

6%)

Oth

er (8

%)

and

late

198

0sF

ishi

ngLa

rge

pel

agic

s (3

1%)

By

div

ing

(14%

)K

ore

a R

O (6

%)

Dem

ersa

ls p

eake

d in

mid

-198

0sH

abita

tO

ther

dem

ersa

l inv

ert.

(14%

)M

ollu

scs

pea

ked

in la

te 1

960s

, ea

rly 1

970s

Larg

e p

elag

ics

dec

linin

g s

ince

late

198

0s

N A

ustr

alia

Mix

edB

ott

om

tra

wls

(31%

)In

do

nesi

a (3

7%)

Shr

imp

cat

ches

cyc

lical

Clim

ate

Larg

e p

elag

ics

(16%

)P

urse

sei

nes

(9%

)T

haila

nd (3

4%)

Larg

e p

elag

ics

pea

ked

in la

te 1

980s

Fis

hing

Med

ium

pel

agic

s (1

5%)

Mid

-wat

er t

raw

ls (9

%)

Aus

tral

ia (1

5%)

Dem

ersa

ls p

eake

d in

ear

ly 1

970s

Med

ium

dem

ersa

ls (1

0%)

Tro

ll lin

es (8

%)

and

ear

ly 1

990s

30

Tab

le 1

6 (c

on

tin

ued

)

LM

EF

ish

ery

Gea

rC

ou

ntr

y fi

shin

gTr

end

sD

rivi

ng

Fo

rce(

s)

NW

Aus

tral

iaM

ixed

Bo

tto

m t

raw

ls (2

6%)

Aus

tral

ia (5

2%)

Sm

all d

emer

sals

pea

ked

in e

arly

197

0sF

ishi

ngS

mal

l pel

agic

s (2

3%)

Bea

ch s

eine

s (1

8%)

Ind

one

sia

(25%

)an

d e

arly

199

0sH

abita

tM

ediu

m d

emer

sals

(15%

)M

id-w

ater

tra

wls

(12%

)T

haila

nd (2

1%)

Pel

agic

s p

eake

d in

mid

-199

0sO

ther

dem

ersa

l inv

ert.

(13%

)H

and

dre

dg

es (8

%)

Sm

all p

elag

ics

incr

easi

ngS

hrim

p c

atch

es s

tab

le

SE

Aus

tral

iaM

ixed

Bo

tto

m t

raw

ls (4

3%)

Aus

tral

ia (6

7%)

Sm

all p

elag

ics

pea

ked

in e

arly

199

0sC

limat

eLa

rge

shar

ks (2

5%)

Trap

s (1

4%)

Ind

one

sia

(23%

)M

ollu

scs

pea

ked

in e

arly

197

0s a

ndF

ishi

ngLa

rge

dem

ersa

ls (2

0%)

Gil l

nets

(13%

)N

ew Z

eala

nd (5

%)

mid

-198

0sP

ollu

tion

Oth

er d

emer

sal i

nver

t. (1

4%)

Lob

ster

, cr

ab c

atch

es s

tead

yH

abita

t

New

Zea

land

Mix

edB

ott

om

tra

wls

(62%

)N

ew Z

eala

nd (9

0%)

Larg

e d

emer

sals

cyc

l ical

but

sta

ble

Clim

ate

She

lfLa

rge

dem

ersa

ls (4

1%)

Sq

uid

ho

oks

(9%

)U

krai

ne (4

%)

sinc

e 19

90F

ishi

ngLa

rge

ben

tho

-pel

agic

s (1

2%)

Ho

oke

s o

r g

org

es (6

%)

Aus

tral

ia (2

%)

Larg

e b

enth

o-p

elag

ics

cycl

ical

but

Po

llutio

nC

epha

lop

od

s (9

%)

rela

tivel

y st

able

Hab

itat

Med

ium

pel

agic

s (9

%)

Sm

all b

enth

o-p

elag

ics

pea

ked

in la

te 1

980s

31

decrease and in 2003 the total catch for the areawas only 684 thousand tonnes. The peak in 1986was dominated by medium pelagic species, mainlythe Japanese pilchard that comprised 78 percentof the catch. In 2003 this figure decreased to 26percent. Instead, small pelagic fish, such asJapanese anchovy, are now the most commonlycaught group of species.

This LME shows the typical longer-term cycle ofpelagic fisheries, in which one group of species isoften replaced by another. This decadal changeis usually attributed to climatic cycles.

In 2003 there were four countries fishing in thearea. Japan is the dominating country (81 percent),followed by China PR (11 percent), Korea RO(6 percent) and Taiwan POC (2 percent).

The trend for gear used in the area follows thetrend of the catches, showing a large peak forpurse seines in 1986. In 2003, 33 percent of thecatch was taken by bottom trawl which makes itthe main used gear in the area. It is followed bypurse seines (25 percent) and mid-water trawls(13 percent).

ii) Systems showing “fishing down the foodchain” effects

Yellow Sea

The Yellow Sea is one of the most intensivelyexploited areas in the world, and has exhibiteda pronounced change in ecosystem structureand “fishing down the food chain” effect. Dueto overexploitation and natural fluctuationsin recruitment, some of the larger-sized andcommercially important species were replaced bysmaller, less valuable, forage fish. When bottomtrawlers were introduced in the early twentiethcentury, many stocks were intensively exploitedby Chinese, Korean and Japanese fishers andall the major stocks were heavily fished in the1960s, which had a significant effect on theecosystem. Pacific herring and chub mackerelbecame dominant in the 1970s. Smaller-bodiedand economically less profitable anchovy andscaled sardine increased in the 1980s and tooka prominent position in the ecosystem.

Drift nets have always been a major gear in thisLME but the catch from bottom trawls has alsobeen increasing and in 2003 accounted for25 percent of the catch.

The countries bordering the Yellow Sea takemost of the catch – China PR 72 percent, Japan11 percent and Korea RO 11 percent.

iii) Systems with reported increasing catchesin all species groups

Bay of Bengal

Commercial species for the Bay of Bengal LMEinclude anchovies, croakers, shrimp and tuna(yellowfin, bigeye and skipjack). Shrimp is a majorexport earner.

FAO data show a steady rise in total landings inall major groups since the 1950s. This appears tobe largely as a result of increased marine landingsreported for Indonesia, Myanmar, Malaysia andBangladesh. The other Bay of Bengal counties(India, Pakistan, Maldives and Sri Lanka) have allreported losses in production in recent years, thegreatest being from India. Increased competitionand conflicts between small-scale and large-scalefishers and reports of declining catches and catchrates by fishers indicate that much of the Bay ofBengal is also over-fished.

There is an alarming increase in cyanide fishingin this LME’s coral reefs for the lucrative live foodfish markets in Hong Kong and Singapore.Mangroves and estuaries – critical fish spawningand nursery areas – are also under stress orthreatened by pollution, sedimentation, dams forflood control (as in Bangladesh), and intensivecoastal aquaculture. States bordering the Bay ofBengal rate overexploitation of marine resourcesas the number one problem in the area.

Catches coming from bottom trawling dominate thecatch, although the LME is characterized by manysmall-scale fishers using a wide variety of gears.

As with the Yellow Sea, it is the countriessurrounding the Bay of Bengal that record thegreatest catches, although not only in their ownEEZs. Thai trawlers are common in Myanmar andknown to operate as far away as Bangladesh.There is also a relatively large high sea area thatsupports caches of tuna and other large pelagicsthat are also fished by several distant-water fishingnations.

32

iv) Fisheries under tight management control

Southeast Australian Shelf

The main species harvested are scallops (in BassStrait), rock lobster (Tasmania), and abalone(Tasmania and Victoria) and finfish in the Southeasttrawl fishery and shark in the shark fisheries. Thelong-standing trawl fishery has seen serialdepletion of several of its important fish stocks,including eastern gemfish and more recently thedeepwater orange roughy that is found associatedwith sea mounts. The fishery has been managedunder individual transferable catch quotas (ITQ)since the early 1990s, but to date these do notappear to have been very effective in reducingoverfishing in this multi-species fishery.

The main gear across the entire LME is bottomtrawling, with other specialized gears catchingscallops, lobsters and sharks (traps, dredges, andgillnets).

Trends in the trophic indices

The “Sea around us” project also providescalculations of the mean trophic level of the annualcatches. In theory, changes in the mean trophiclevel reflect changes in the ecosystem structure,a higher value indicating a greater presence oflarger predators, and vice versa.

In the Kuroshio Current LME, because this systemis dominated by a few species groups, the changein trophic structure reflects the changing speciesmix. The low trophic index corresponds to thepeak in the medium pelagic species group, mainlyJapanese pilchards that are relatively low in thefood chain. More recently, the switch to therelatively higher trophic level species can alsobe seen (Figure 29).

In contrast, the Yellow Sea LME shows lessdramatic changes but a steady decline in the meantrophic level, consistent with “fishing down the foodchain”, is apparent (Figure 30). In the Bay ofBengal that has reported increased catches in allmajor groups, a decline in the mean trophic levelcan also be detected, suggestive of an overall shiftin trophic structure in the Bay, or at least in thetargeted species (Figure 31).

In SE Australia, the overall pattern in the meantrophic level is more similar to that of the KuroshioCurrent, but in the Australian case (Figure 32)reflects changes in catch composition thatoccurred as a result of overfishing as well asmanagement interventions. Catches of fish high onthe trophic scale, such as Southern Bluefin tuna,

were very high in the 1960s. The collapse of thesecatches and the introduction of strict quotasbrought about a shift to lower food chain speciesafter this time. However, since the mid-1980s themean trophic index has increased again, driven byincreased catches of sharks and species such asblue grenadier.

Ecosystem modelling

Fishery assessments based on ecosystemmodelling have also been carried out in the region,especially in the eight States with extensive historictrawl survey data that allow better estimates on theamount of fish present in the sea. This approachis based on ecosystem modelling (e.g. Ecopath andEcosim) that allows an analysis of the structure|and function of whole ecosystems and how theyhave changed overtime. Christensen and hisco-workers at the UBC are pioneering theapproach and conducting analyses for the majorLMEs. In the APFIC region they have concludedan analysis of the impact of fishing in the SouthChina Sea.4 This analysis clearly showed that forthis large sea, “fishing down the food chain” hasoccurred, indicating gradual replacement of large,long-lived predators by small, short-lived fish lowerdown the food chain, often referred to now as“trash fish”. The only exception to these trendswas off the coast of Brunei Darussalam wherefishing pressure is much lighter than in otherStates, since it effectively has marine protectedareas (MPAs) around its oil rigs.

3.5 Evidence from fisher’s perceptions

Evidence gained directly from fisher’s and fishingcommunities perceptions are perhaps the mostdifficult to describe and quantify but are alwaysconsistent with the evidence derived from othersources. There are many studies documentedthroughout the region where participatoryassessments have been carried out, on a rangeof scales focussing on one or two selectedvillages to large organized fishing associations(e.g. trawl-owners associations). The APFICSecretariat did not have the resources to providea comprehensive review but in many cases the

4 Christensen, V.T., Garces, L.R., Silvestre, G.T. and Pauly,D. (2003). Fisheries impact on the South China Sea largemarine ecosystem: A preliminary analysis using spatiallyexplicit methodology, p. 51-62 in Silvestre, G.T., Garces,L.R., Stobutzki, I., Ahmed, M., Santos, R.A.V., Luna, C.Z.,Lachica-Alino, L., Christensen, V., Pauly, D. & Munro (eds.)Assessment, management and future directions for coastalfisheries in Asian States. WorldFish Center ConferenceProceedings 67, 1 120 pp.

33

Mean trophic level

Trop

hic

leve

l

3.5

3.4

3.3

3.21950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Mean trophic level

Tro

phic

leve

l

3.4

3.3

3.2

3.1

3.0

2.9

2.8

2.7

2.61950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Figure 29Mean trophic level index for the Kuroshio Current LMECopied from http://www.seaaroundus.org/lme/lme.aspx

Figure 30Mean trophic level index for the Yellow Sea LMECopied from http://www.seaaroundus.org/lme/lme.aspx

Figure 31Mean trophic level Index for the Bay of Bengal LMECopied from http://www.seaaroundus.org/lme/lme.aspx

Mean trophic level

Trop

hic

leve

l

3.7

3.6

3.5

3.41950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

34

Figure 32Mean trophic level index for the Southeast Australia LMECopied from http://www.seaaroundus.org/lme/lme.aspx

Table 17Status of tuna species in the Western and Central Pacific and in the Indian Ocean

Species Central & Western Pacific Indian Ocean

Skipjack tuna Underexploited Underexploited

Yellowfin tuna Under/fully exploited Fully exploited

Bigeye tuna Fully/overexploited Fully/overexploited

Albacore tuna Underexploited Underexploited

Swordfish Overexploited

Mean trophic level

Trop

hic

leve

l

3.73.63.53.4

3.02.92.82.72.6

3.33.23.1

1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

35

story seems to be the same – catches and catchper boat (gear, fishing lot etc.) have declineddramatically over the past 10-20 years. The statusof the tuna species in the Western and CentralPacific and in the Indian Ocean can be seen inTable 17.

FAO has recently commissioned severalparticipatory assessments across the region,including Timor-Leste, Viet Nam, Cambodia. Aspart of the response to the 2004 tsunami, FAO hassupported rapid but limited assessments of theimpacts of the tsunami on the fisheries resourcesof some affected areas of Sri Lanka, Indonesia andThailand. The objective of these assessments wasto inform the fisheries sector rehabilitation andreconstruction planning efforts.

Findings from these assessments to date indicatethat in the perceptions of the fishers there has beenno significant direct impact of the tsunami on thefisheries resources. However, localized impactsdue to habitat modification (closing of lagoons,destruction of mangrove and reef etc.) have beenreported.

In terms of long-term trends prior to the tsunami,fishers in all these countries reported decliningcatches and increasing numbers of vessels in thefisheries.

Inland waters

3.6 Water resources

Because of the high population density in Asia,the per capita availability of freshwater is thelowest in the world and competing usages offreshwater have a major impact on fisheries. Themain water resources for fisheries are the riversand flood plains, natural lakes and man-madeimpoundments. The seasonal floodplains ofStates such as Myanmar and Bangladesh all havemajor fisheries. In contrast, Asia has relativelyfew natural lakes and most of these are confinedto volcanic areas, notably in the Indonesian andPhilippine archipelagos, and in northern India.The major exception is the Great Lake or TonleSap in Cambodia which occupies 200-300 km2 inthe dry season, expanding to 10 000-12 000 km2

in the wet.

Over the centuries, reservoirs have beenconstructed in some States in Asia (e.g. Sri Lanka),but more recently construction of reservoirs forirrigation, hydropower and flood protection hasbecome common in many parts of the Asia-Pacificregion.

The reservoir resource in Asia is large and accountsfor over 40 percent of the global large reservoircapacity. These range from large impoundmentsresulting from damming major rivers to smallrainfed ponds. It has been estimated thatdeveloping States in Asia have 66.7 million ha ofsmall to medium reservoirs with 85 thousand haoccurring in China.

3.7 Fishery resources

Most inland fisheries are small-scale activitieswhere the catch per craft (or catch per capita) isrelatively small and the catch more often than notdisposed of on the same day. The main exceptionsare the industrialized fisheries in the lower MekongBasin and the “fishing lots” in the Tonle Sap ofCambodia and the fishing “inns” of Myanmar. Thelack of accurate reporting of these small-scalefisheries makes it difficult to assess their statusbut they are under considerable pressure from boththe loss and degradation of habitat and fromoverfishing.

Freshwater fishes are reported to be the mostthreatened group of vertebrates harvested by man.It has been estimated by the World ResourcesInstitute that half of the world’s species were lostduring the last century and that dams, diversionsand canals have fragmented many major rivers,severely impacting fisheries resources.

Many of the inland water habitats have beenaltered and degraded. Rivers and floodplains, inparticular, have been heavily impacted with theconstruction of dams, roads, channels and otherirrigation systems. The training of water to reducethe impacts of flooding has probably hadwidespread effects on inland fisheries in the region,although the real impacts are poorly documented.Fishers regularly complain that catches aredeclining, but it is uncertain to what extent this isan effect of increasing fishery pressure or the lossof fishery resources through habitat degradationand changing water flow regimes.

Major changes in the way large systems functionhave enormously altered some areas by greatlyreducing the seasonal “flood pulse” that previouslyresulted in large areas of land becoming floodedduring the wet season. This has impacted on theability of many species of fish to migrate to theirspawning grounds and has also altered the flowpattern with accompanied habitat changes (e.g.running water to lakes). Some mitigation attemptshave been made in terms of fish ladders to allow

36

fish to migrate around dams but their successcompared with original conditions is unknown.

Changing agricultural patterns including irrigationdevelopment and the increased use of chemicalsand pesticides in intensified agricultural productionhave all had some impact on wild fishery resources.

As in the marine environment, changes in speciescomposition are also occurring. Catches of large,long lived species such as the giant catfish andlarge cyprinid species are becoming rare and thereis evidence of “fishing down the food chain” insome inland areas. In the Mekong River, forexample, the giant catfish (Pangasianodon gigas)has now become extremely rare and endangered.

On the other hand, the status of some inlandfishery resources has been enhanced throughstocking programmes, introductions of exoticspecies, habitat engineering and habitatimprovement. Stock enhancement is an integralpart of most inland fisheries in the Asia-Pacificregion and is increasing, particularly where somesort of access restriction or user rights are in place.In general, fisheries in large lakes and rivers dependon naturally recruited stocks and the economicviability of stock enhancement has not beendemonstrated in any Asian State. In floodplaindepressions and in small water bodies, stock

enhancement has proven to be very successful.These cultured-based fisheries are seen as a wayforward in China PR and many States in theregion.5

Of particular importance to many States of theAsia-Pacific region are rice-field fisheries thateither depend on natural introduction of wildfish or stocking fish, either simultaneously oralternately with the rice crop (probably morecorrectly defined as aquaculture). The fish areimportant for local consumption and marketing,and support rural livelihoods in developing States.It is particularly important for food security as it isthe most readily available, reliable and cheapestsource of animal protein for farming communitiesas well as the landless. This importance isgenerally underestimated and undervalued. It isreported that the availability of this aquaticresource is declining. Anecdotal evidence fromChina, Viet Nam, Lao PDR, Cambodia, Thailandand elsewhere suggests that it is considerablymore difficult to find such food now than a decadeor so ago. This is a result of increasing demandthrough human population increases and activitiessuch as the use of pesticides, destruction of fishbreeding grounds and the use of illegal fishingmethods such as poisons and electro-fishing.

5 De Silva, S. & Funge-Smith, S. A Review of stockenhancement practices in the inland water fisheries of Asia,RAP Publication 2005/12http://www.apfic.org/modules/mydownloads/viewcat.php?cid=5

37

4. Status of Aquaculture

This part of the document will deal with the review of major groups of species that are currently culturedin the Asia-Pacific region. The manner of grouping species will be according to the trophic needs of thespecies and in some cases the degree of reliance on external inputs (such as feeds and infrastructure forculture).

Catfish

The top five producing states are China PR,Thailand, Indonesia, India and Malaysia. Totalproduction in 2004 was 652 386 tonnes andChina PR produced 58 percent of the totalproduction. China started to report on this groupin 2003. The production (without China) showsa slow increasing trend with an average growthrate of 11 percent. This would be greater ifVietnamese production of Pangasius was alsoincluded (Viet Nam does not report Pangasiusseparately from “freshwater fish nei”).

The top five species are Amur catfish (Silurusasotus), Torpedo-shaped catfishes nei (Clariasspp.), Hybrid catfish (C. batrachus x C. gariepinus),Yellow catfish and Channel catfish (approx90 percent of the total production for the group).In addition, Viet Nam produces significantquantities of catfish of the Pangasius spp.Viet Nam produced over 300 000 tonnes in 2004which is a significant increase over the estimated180 000 tonnes for 2003.2

Snakeheads

The total production in 2004 was 285 173 tonnesand the top four producing states are China PR,India, Indonesia and Thailand. China PR has juststarted to report snakehead production separately(as with the catfish) in 2003. In 2004 China PRproduced 84 percent of the total Asian production.

The trend for this goup is hard to define. Indonesiaand Thailand show a stable trend at a low level(approx 6 600 tonnes). India has fluctuated in thepast ten years with a high in 2000 of 80 740 tonnesand a low in 2001 of 1 301 tonnes but is againshowing an increase to almost 30 000 in 2004. Theproduction in China PR increased by 35 percent to238 754 tonnes (2003 to 2004).

Knifefish and gobies

These species are not widely cultured but havea good market price in certain countries. The sandgoby production in Asia is almost totally based on

4.1 Carnivorous species or speciesrequiring higher production inputs

Freshwater carnivorous species

Eels

During the period 1988 to 1998, the world’saquaculture production of eels doubled from98 000 tonnes to 217 000 tonnes, of which95 percent was produced in Asian farms.

Eel production in Japan (Anguilla japonica) hasremained stable for the past ten years at around20 000 tonnes. The production of Taiwan POC hasdeclined greatly to the lowest level in 1999. Incontrast, production in China PR has risen steadily,until a peak in 1997, remaining just below thislevel until reaching a new high in 2004 at a level of178 176 tonnes.

This production is reported as Japanese eel,however, China PR also imports European glasseels (Anguilla Anguilla) and hence some of thisreported production would be the European eel. In2004, Chinese swamp eel production was alsohigh at 137 486 tonnes for 2004. Malaysia andKorea RO also produce some quantities ofJapanese eel through aquaculture.

Europe has increasingly supplied Asian eelfarms with glass eels, and the region has graduallybecome more dependent on wild-caught eels ofEurope. In 1997, for example, France exportedmore than 266 tonnes of European eels todestinations outside the EU (amounting to55 percent of all EU eel exports outside Europethat year).1

Salmonid – Freshwater culture

Freshwater production of trout species in the regionhas been fairly stable over the last decade with theexception of the development of the industry ofRainbow trout in IR Iran, which has almost doubledproduction in two years (to 30 000 tonnes). Ayusweetfish (Plecoglossus altivelis) production inJapan has declined by about 25 percent in the lastdecade (7 200 tonnes).

1 TRAFFIC reporthttp://www.traffic.org/dispatches/archives/march2001/eel.html

2 h t tp : / /www.g lobe f i sh .o rg / i ndex .php? id=2291&easysitestatid=626311130

38

on-growing of wild caught fingerlings. The totalproduction of Knifefishes and Marble goby was214 tonnes in 2004. Malaysia is the top producer,followed by Indonesia, Singapore and Thailand.

Thailand has shown a declining trend. In Malaysiaproduction has declined by half in a five year periodto around 100 tonnes in 2004, except for a peakin 2003 of 700 tonnes.

Marine and brackish water carnivorous species

Barramundi and Japanese Seabass

Barramundi (Lates calcifer) is gaining ground withthe regional total reaching 29 884 tonnes in 2004.Thailand has become the top producer in theregion with a still increasing trend. The Thaiproduction is still largely marketed domestically.There has been a significant reduction inproduction from Hong Kong SAR which may bedue to a shift towards higher value speciesand limited site availability. Korea RO is alsoproducing Japanese seabass (Lateolabraxjaponicus, 1 850 tonnes in 2004). China PR hasalso reported large production of Japaneseseabass starting in 2003 and 2004 (217 000 tonnesin 2004), which may be an effect of China PR’simproved reporting on individual species (thesespecies may have previously been reported undermarine finfish nei).

There has been limited international trade of thesespecies either live or processed and futureexpansion may be reliant on the development ofregional or international markets. There is someinterest in Lates niloticus , the Nile Perch which hasparticularly white flesh and is widely traded asa commodity; Lates calcarifer does not have suchgood flesh colour, but may still offer some potentialas an alternative in some markets.

Salmonids – Brackishwater/Mariculture

Culture of salmonids (chinook, coho, Atlanticsalmon and rainbow trout) in brackishwater andmariculture is reported from Australia, New Zealandand Japan and is currently at 29 631 tonnes.Japanese coho salmon culture had a peak in 1991and has declined sharply in 1995 and hit itslowest point in 2002 dropping to 31 percent ofits 1991 production. In 2004 the productionreached 9 607 tonnes. New Zealand’s chinooksalmon production is relatively stable at just over5 000 tonnes.

Australian brackishwater culture of rainbowtrout has declined over the past ten years from 890tonnes (1988) to zero reported in 1994. In contrast,over the past ten years the Australian Atlantic

salmon industry has developed considerably toa current figure of 14 828 tonnes in 2004.

Marine and brackishwater carnivorous fish

Over 40 species of marine and brackishwatercarnivorous (or largely carnivorous) finfish arereported and are largely cultured in cages.

Japanese culture of Amberjack (Seriola) is theleader with production stable at 150 068 tonnes in2004. The production of several other Japanesespecies is also quite stable (such as pufferfish,several mackerel species and bastard halibut) andit is assumed that this is due to site limitationswhich effectively prevent further expansion. InJapan and Korea RO particularly, it is inevitablethat there will be a turn towards imports fromneighbouring States such as China PR.

Cobia

Cobia (Rachycentron) culture increased rapidly in13 tonnes in 1996 to 2 400 tonnes in 2002 and was20 461 tonnes in 2004 (this is largely because ofChina PR reporting this species separately).Chinese production in 2004 was 16 493 tonnes.Taiwan POC reports a production of 3 968 tonnesfor 2004. Culture of this species is also taking offrapidly in other States such as Viet Nam andThailand, possibly as a result of the increasingavailability of fingerlings from Taiwan POC(however, this is not yet being reported widely,therefore the total production can be consideredconservative). The very rapid growth rate of thisspecies and relative hardiness in ponds makes itan attractive species for aquaculture, althoughmarket acceptance is not yet definite.

Southern Bluefin Tuna

Southern Bluefin Tuna culture in Australia hasemerged as a significant industry for the countryover the past ten years reaching 4 000 tonnes in2002 and stayed at this level in 2004. Although thequantity is relatively low compared with theJapanese Amberjack production, the very highvalue of this product makes it a significanteconomic activity where it is practiced.

The total value of the Australian Southern BluefinTuna wild harvest component of the fishery wasapproximately US$50.5 million, and the value-added from grow out of wild caught fish inseacages is approximately US$97.3 million3

(2002-2003).3 http://www.afma.gov.au/fisheries/tuna/sbt/default.htm

ht tp : / /www.aus t ra l i anaquacu l tu repor ta l .com/PDF/industry_bluefin_1.pdf

39

Seabream

Seabream production is confined to Japan,China PR, Taiwan POC, Korea RO and Hong KongSAR. The Japanese production of seabreamwas 80 959 tonnes in 2004, more than half that(54 percent) of amberjack. China PR has startedreporting over 40 000 tonnes starting from 2003.The production of this species was probablyreported earlier as Other marine finfish nei.

Other marine finfish not elsewhere identified(nei)

Most of these fish are assumed to be carnivorousand are fed by trash fish from the Chinese capturefisheries. China PR production of European turbotis estimated at about 3 000 tonnes representingabout 33 percent of global aquaculture production.4

This group of fish is of interest because of the largereported production from China PR. Even thoughChina PR has decreased its reporting on neispecies by 64 percent since 2002, the quantity of“marine finfish nei” reported by China PR equalsthe total aquaculture production of Malaysia. Sincethe individual species are not reported, trendscannot be determined.

It is important to point out that an increase intrends for a species most likely is a result ofimproved reporting on individual species. Table 18and Figure 33 show the apparent drop inproduction for China PR between 2002 and 2004,an artefact caused by improved detailed reportingof individual species.

Table 18Aquaculture production reported under “marinefinfish nei”

Country Tonnes 2002 Tonnes 2004

China PR 560 404 202 587

Japan 8 287 6 951

Taiwan POC 3 372 3 027

India – 2 778

Indonesia 2 937 1 602

Malaysia 2 669 1 458

Hong Kong SAR 597 493

Philippines 94 162

Singapore 47 55

Korea RO 81 3

4 http://www.ices.dk/committe/acfm/comwork/report/2005/may/Wild%20cultured%20fish%20interactions.pdf

4.2 Finfish requiring lower inputs

Freshwater omnivorous and herbivorous fish havebeen important food fish for developing States inthe Asia-Pacific region. Traditional productionmethods have become diversified and intensified,starting with fertilized polyculture systems andmoving towards systems using supplemental feedsand even complete feeds. As demand for fishincreases and prices rise, further pressure onintensification and the use of feeding can beexpected in many States.

Backyard ponds are an increasingly common sightin many States; however, this production isfrequently missed in national statistical surveys dueto the small unit size. In many cases ponds maybe below the size required for registration andproduction from them is not viewed as a significanteconomic activity. However, the large numbers ofthese ponds and the aggregated production andvalue to the households engaging in the activityis probably very significant. The lack of reliableinformation from this part of the sector currentlylimits evaluation of the grassroots impact of ruralaquaculture in the Asia-Pacific region.

It has been suggested that the wide range ofspecies that are currently produced fromaquaculture will decrease as greater rationalizationand aggregation of production operations focus ona smaller number of species. This lesson has beentaken from the livestock sector and is consideredto be an essential part of the “industrialization” ofaquaculture. This trend does not appear to be thecase so far in the Asia-Pacific region with farmersincreasingly seeking out new species that givethem a marketing or profit advantage.

Figure 33Trend in reporting by species for marine fishesin China PR (1 000 tonnes)

0

200

400

600

800

1 000

1 200

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

Marine f ishes nei By species Total

40

Tilapia

This “industrialization” trend is seen in someStates with species such as tilapia. There isa trend towards standardization of size, feedsand production systems, some quality control,avoidance of off-flavours, and marketing insupermarket chains.

However, even with tilapia, there is stillconsiderable flexibility of systems, strains andcolours of fish. There is probably more diversityin tilapia culture systems today than ten years agowith a range of characteristics including:

� Colouration (red, white and black strains)

� Monosex and mixed sex

� Pellet fed, supplemental feed and fertilizedgreenwater

� Freshwater and brackishwater

� Cold tolerance

Carps and Barbs (cyprinids)

Carps and barbs continue to be the most popularspecies group among Asia-Pacific Statesdominating eight ranks of the top ten freshwaterspecies by production. Their production isparticularly important in terms of the vital supplyof protein in major populous States in the regionsuch as China PR, India and Bangladesh.

Silver carp has maintained the highest productionfor decades. Grass carp was once in a distantsecond place but has recently closed the gapbetween the two species and was in 2004 at thesame level.

Common carp, the third highest productionspecies, is literally the most commonly culturedspecies in the region; 20 States and areas havereported culturing this species (Table 21).

Table 19Tilapia top eight producer States (2004)

Country Tonnes

China PR 897 276

Indonesia 156 010

Philippines 145 869

Thailand 97 653

Taiwan POC 89 275

Lao PDR 29 205

Malaysia 25 642

Myanmar 2 000

Reported exports of tilapia are still low (~9 percent)relative to total regional production. The continuingdomestic demand and the high quality required forexport targeted fish means that domestic marketingis still attractive in many States. The biggestexporter of frozen whole tilapia and frozen filletsto the USA was China (Mainland and TaiwanProvince), which accounts for virtually all importsof this product by the USA5 (Table 20).

5 http://www.eurofish.dk/indexSub.php?id=3059

Table 20Countries exporting tilapia (2004)

Country Tonnes

China PR 78 865

Taiwan POC 40 570

Thailand 8 086

Table 21Carps and barbs top ten producer States (2004)

Country Tonnes

China PR 14 369 900

India 2 116 327

Bangladesh 616 151

Indonesia 216 517

Myanmar 163 000

Thailand 67 152

Iran 65 400

Lao PDR 32 450

Nepal 20 000

Cambodia 18 049

Although production of most species in this groupgenerally exhibits increasing trends, the rate ofgrowth since 2001 for Silver carp has started toshow signs of slowing down.

There are reports that the profitability of productionof these species in India and China is declining andfarmers are starting to explore the production ofalternative higher value species. Since the marketsof these species are largely domestic, there islittle opportunity for export, although India, forexample, does export to neighbouring Nepal andBangladesh.

Pacus and Pirapatinga (Collossoma spp. andPiaractus spp.)

These Latin American species are not reportedin detail for most countries grouped under“Freshwater species nei”. China PR has started

41

reporting production of Piaractus (86 409 tonnes)separately.

Freshwater fish nei

Statistics from China PR have reported thereduction of “Freshwater fish nei” from 2 milliontonnes in 2002 to less than 540 000 tonnes in2004. These fish are now reported by speciesand, interestingly, are mostly carnivorous specieswith the exception of Pirapatinga (Piaractusbrachypomus). The species which are nowreported in detail are Amur Catfish (245 874),Snakehead (238 754), Swamp eel (137 486),Pirapatinga (86 409), Pond loach (79 409), Yellowcatfish (63 062), Channel catfish (62 618), Sea trout(11 869), Sturgeons nei (11 269), Pond smelt(10 056), Chinese longsnout catfish (5 938) andSalmonids nei (2 366).

Milkfish

Milkfish culture is a strong tradition in thePhilippines which reflects the country’s preferencefor the species. There are also traditions of milkfishculture in some of the Pacific Islands (Kiribati,Nauru, Cook Islands and Palau). Of thesecountries only Kiribati reports production to FAO.Milkfish have typically been produced inbrackishwater ponds but there is an increasingtrend in reported mariculture production, indicatingthe use of more intensive cage systems. Thesesystems are fed with either pellets or trash fish andare part of the general trend of intensification ofmariculture in the Philippines.

Indonesia and the Philippines are traditionallythe largest producers. Taiwan POC is reducingits production, possibly because of increasingattention to higher value species. Singapore hassteadily developed its mariculture of milkfish(Table 22).

Mullet

Pond based brackishwater culture of mullet istypical but Korea RO has been reporting increasingmariculture production since 2000. Indonesia hasthe largest production of this species andexperienced a sharp decline in 1998 but showsa fluctuating increasing trend. Taiwan POC hasrelatively stable production but has seen a gradualreduction in production. Thailand has greatlyreduced production in recent years.

4.3 Crustaceans

Whilst a number of crustacean species arecultured, the predominant commercial species arebrackishwater shrimps, freshwater prawns andfreshwater/brackishwater crabs.

Penaeid shrimp culture

Marine shrimp continued to dominate crustaceanaquaculture, with two major species accounting forover 56 percent of the total crustacean productionin 2004 (the White leg shrimp, Penaeus vannameiand Giant Tiger shrimp, Penaeus monodon). Whiteleg shrimp production in Asia-Pacific increasedfrom 2 000 tonnes in 2000 to over a million tonnesin 2004. A significant amount of this productioncomes from China PR (735 055 tonnes) andThailand (276 600) as well as increasing amountsfrom Indonesia and Viet Nam. Many othercountries are now producing this species, however,not yet at a level where it is entering the statistics.

Whilst the White leg shrimp ranked 10th by weightin terms of regional aquaculture production in 2004,it ranked 1st by value at US$3 684 million.

Cultured shrimp production in the regionreached 2.6 million tonnes in 2004 (accountingfor 65 percent of total shrimp landings). Theproduction of P. monodon has ranged between560 000 and 720 000 tonnes since 1994, whilstits contribution to overall shrimp production hasdeclined from over 70 percent to 33 percent in2004, as P. vannamei production has drasticallyincreased. P. chinensis had a stable increaseduring the 1990’s but has decreased since 2002 toits lowest level since 1985.

Production trends in the region have increasedover the past ten years for the major producers(Table 23). China PR suffered a major setback inthe mid-1990s due to the occurrence of viraldiseases in shrimp culture, but since that timeproduction has slowly recovered and has beenincreasing rapidly in recent years.

Table 22Milkfish top four producer States (2004)

Country Culture Environment Tonnes

Philippines Brackishwater 208 975Marine 37 351Freshwater 27 266

Indonesia Brackishwater 241 418Marine 20

Taiwan POC Brackishwater 25 053Freshwater 31 800

Singapore Marine 1 839

42

Other major producers, Thailand and Viet Nam,have also encountered fluctuations in productionwhich are primarily associated with the impact ofdiseases. Production in the Philippines, India,Sri Lanka and Indonesia has also been affected bythe impact of viral diseases (typically WSSV6).Generally, high international market demand hasmaintained interest in the culture of shrimp forexport.

Total production of P. vannamei in Asia wasapproximately 1.1 million tonnes in 2004. The mainreason for the importation of P. vannamei to Asiahas been the poor performance, slow growth rateand disease susceptibility of the major indigenouscultured shrimp species, P. chinensis in China PRand P. monodon virtually everywhere else. Shrimpproduction in Asia has been marred by seriousviral pathogens causing significant losses to theculture industries of most Asian States overthe past decade. It was not until the late 1990sthat, spurred by the production of the importedP. vannamei, Asian (and therefore world) productionlevels began to increase again.

There are problems associated with this dramaticincrease in the production of P. vannamei in termsof marketing of the product. With so many Statesnow producing essentially the same product, globalprices dropped dramatically during 2002-2003.There has been a trend towards decreasing shrimpprices for a number of years now. This has follow-up effects regarding the actual value of the productsold and disagreements regarding possible“dumping” of shrimp onto markets.

Freshwater prawns

China PR and India have recently increased theproduction of freshwater prawns (their respectiveproduction levels were zero and 311 tonnes in 1994as compared to 339 913 tonnes and 38 965 in2004). Even Thailand and Bangladesh showincreasing trends in production of freshwaterprawns. Other producers have had relatively stableproduction levels (Table 24).

Table 23Penaeid shrimp top ten producer States (2004)

Country Tonnes

China PR 935 944

Thailand 390 000

Viet Nam 275 569

Indonesia 238 341

India 133 020

Bangladesh 58 044

Philippines 37 947

Malaysia 30 838

Myanmar 30 000

Taiwan POC 12 913

6 Shrimp White Spot Syndrome Virus.

Table 24Freshwater prawn top eight producer States(2004)

Country Tonnes

China PR 339 913

India 38 965

Thailand 28 500

Bangladesh 17 123

Taiwan POC 10 039

Viet Nam7 6 247

Malaysia 317

Indonesia 290

Since it is not easy to intensify production offreshwater prawns due to their territorial habitsand divergent growth effects, the development ofthis sector is reasonably slow. In some States thesector has shrunk, as attention and resources havebeen diverted to brackishwater shrimp production.There have also been significant increases in theproduction of L. vannamei and other Penaeidshrimp in freshwater (or extremely low salinitysystems inland). Reported production is very low(only 4 611 tonnes of L. vannamei are currentlyreported from freshwater production) and does notreflect the fact that there is substantial productionof this species in inland areas.

Although the principle species cultured infreshwater (M. rosenbergii) does not suffer thesame problems with viral diseases that impact thebrackishwater shrimp industry so severely, exportmarkets for freshwater prawns are much smallerand less developed. This is because consumersin general are not as familiar with these species aswith brackishwater shrimp. Freshwater prawns,however, enjoy good domestic markets, especiallyin South and Southeast Asian States.

7 This figure was reported as freshwater crustaceans nei.,which was most likely freshwater prawn production, andhence it is included here.

43

Crabs

Chinese river crab (Eriocheir sinensis) andIndo-Pacific swamp crab (Scylla serrata)constituted the major cultured crabs in the region.China PR production of Eriocheir sinensis andmarine crabs8 has shown very strong growth since1994 and they were ranked 14th and 4th respectivelyamong the region’s top cultured crab species ininland and marine waters in 2004. Indo-Pacificswamp crab showed stable increasing productiontrends for the past decade. The reporting ofmarine crabs nei from China PR has declined from178 185 tonnes in 2002 to around 10 000 tonnesin 2004. At the same time, the named species ofIndo-Pacific swamp crab and Swimming crabs etc.,nei has increased from zero to 108 503 tonnes and74 625 tonnes respectively.

4.4 Molluscs

Mollusc culture is split into low value speciesproduced in extensive cultured systems (e.g.seeded blood cockle mudflats, mussel and oysterstake culture) and high value species produced inintensive systems (fed systems, and possiblyrecirculation).

Recent improved breakdown by species ofaquaculture production of Chinese molluscs hasgiven a better indication of the proportion of lowand high value mollusc production. Reportedproduction of “Molluscs nei” in China PR hasdropped from 1.25 million to 800 000 tonnes.

Whilst it is possible to separate species such asAbalone or Giant clam as high value species, thereare difficulties with some species such as musselsthat may be cultured in low input systems in onecountry (e.g. Thailand) but relatively high input inanother (e.g. New Zealand). Many States reporttheir mollusc production in a large grouping suchas marine molluscs nei.

The IFPRI/WFC outlook on fish supply9 projectedincreasing mollusc production, although this mayhave been based on current production trendsrather than resource potential. The issue of siteavailability is likely to constrain future developmentof mollusc culture in several States as can be seen

for the examples of Japan and Korea RO (Table 25and 26). In these two States, the production ofmolluscs and seaweeds has been relatively stablefor many years. This indicates that suitable sitesmay now all be taken.

8 Although the species name is not specified in China PRofficial statistics, it is most likely Indo-Pacific swamp crab.

9 Delgado, C.D, Wada, N., Rosegrant, M.W., Meijer, S. andAhmed, M. (2003). Fish to 2020. Supply and demand inchanging global markets. WorldFish Center TechnicalReport 62. 226 pp.

Table 25Lower value molluscs top ten producer (2002)

Country Species Tonnes

China PR Japanese carpet shell 2 799 004

China PR Constricted tagelus 676 391

China PR Blood cockle 323 225

Thailand Green mussel 296 900

China PR Sea snails 202 452

New Zealand New Zealand mussel 85 000

China PR Swan mussel 84 895

Thailand Blood cockle 75 600

Malaysia Blood cockle 64 565

Korea RO Japanese carpet shell 27 570

Table 26Higher value molluscs top ten producer (2002)

Country Species Tonnes

China PR Pacific cupped oyster 3 750 910

China PR Yesso scallop 910 352

Korea RO Pacific cupped oyster 239 270

Japan Pacific cupped oyster 234 151

Japan Yesso scallop 215 203

Thailand Cupped oyster nei 27 900

Taiwan POC Pacific cupped oyster 20 750

Philippines Slipper cupped oyster 15 915

Australia Sydney cupped oyster 5 600

Australia Pacific cupped oyster 3 495

Unlike fish culture, the intensification of molluscculture is quite difficult and probably noteconomically viable. The trend in mollusc cultureis more likely to be a shift from lower value speciesto higher value species in those areas where sitesare suitable.

A further dimension is the development of intensiveon shore culture operations such as those forabalone and a number of gastropod species.

4.5 Aquatic plants

Aquatic plant production can be divided into twodistinct groups. The first group consists ofseaweeds of temperate waters solely andtraditionally used for food purposes and the secondgroup consists of tropical species mainlyprocessed as a source of commercially valuable

44

biopolymers (carrageenan, agar) that are used forvarious food and non-food purposes (Table 27).

Philippines has the highest production of theseaquatic plants and Eucheuma cottonii (Zanzibarweed) production in the Philippines far exceeds theproduction of other seaweeds (one million tonnesin 2004).

New areas are being investigated for the expansionof seaweed production since global demand forcarrageenan and other alginates is expected tocontinue to rise.

4.6 Reptiles and amphibians

Reported species are soft shell turtle, crocodilesand frogs. China PR has greatly increased itsreported production of soft-shell turtle in the pastfive years. The production of soft-shell turles inChina PR has increased by 77 percent in five yearsto total production of 163 257 tonnes. Other stateswho reported production of turtles are Thailand,Taiwan POC and Korea RO.

There are limited data on frog production, althoughfrogs are being increasingly cultured in manyStates. China has reported production of73 837 tonnes of frogs in 2004. The small size ofa typical frog farm (using small cement tanks oreven pens) means that quantification of this typeof operation is problematic.

Crocodile production is growing quickly in theregion with Cambodia exporting juvenilecrocodiles to both Viet Nam and China PR.Thailand and Papua New Guinea also havecrocodile farms. This production is rarely reportedin fishery or aquaculture statistics.

Table 27Aquatic plants top ten producer States (2004)

Countries Tonnes

China PR 10 714 610

Philippines 1 204 808

Korea RO 547 108

Japan 484 389

Korea DPR 444 295

Indonesia 410 570

Malaysia 30 957

Viet Nam 30 000

Cambodia 16 840

Taiwan POC 9 164

Seaweeds for food purposes

This group includes Japanese kelp, laver (Nori),green laver and Wakame. The production of thesespecies is confined to East Asian States and hasa relatively stable production.

Major cultured aquatic plants in East Asia are Laver(Nori), Japanese kelp and Wakame. They are allseaweeds for food purposes in contrast to thoseproduced in Southeast Asia, which are mainly usedas a source of commercially valuable biopolymers.

The only exception to this is Japanese kelpculture, which has the largest share of production(33 percent in 2004). Its production doubled fromtwo million tonnes in the three years to 1993 andanother one million tonnes was added in the nextsix years. This rapid increase was probably dueto continued expansion of cultured areas in China.Production of Japanese kelp peaked in 1999 andsince then has stabilized, which might indicate thatthe rapid expansion of production area reacheda limit and further sites are not available.

Recent detailed reporting from China PR has givena clearer picture of aquatic plant production(Table 28).

Seaweeds for biopolymers

This group consists of Eucheuma, Kappaphycus,Gracilaria, red seaweeds and others. The

Table 28Aquatic plants top ten cultured species (2004)

Species Tonnes

Japanese kelp 4 519 701

Wakame 2 519 880

Laver (Nori) 1 397 660

Zanzibar weed (Euchema) 1 070 794

Warty gracilaria 898 027

Red seaweeds 410 570

Fusiform sargassum 131 680

Eucheuma seaweeds nei 101 889

Spiny eucheuma 85 754

Elkhorn sea moss 44 814

45

4.7 Niche aquaculture species

There are a number of niche aquaculture speciesthat this review does not cover with statisticalinformation. These species are either cultured atthe pilot/experimental level or simply not reportedby many States. Some of the species are not foodtype commodities (e.g. sponge and pearls,ornamental shells, ornamental fish) and aretherefore not routinely monitored by the authorityreporting fisheries information (Table 29).

Table 29Niche aquaculture species (2004)

Species Tonnes

Japanese sea cucumber 53 315

Jellyfishes 39 415

Sea squirts nei 21 442

Sea urchins nei 7 491

Aquatic invertebrates nei 2 744

Sea cucumbers nei 42

46

1 FAO consultant’s report provided by Gary Morgan,Consultant, Australia.

2 Sugiyama, S., Staples, D. & Funge-Smith, S.J. 2004.Status and potential of fisheries and aquaculture in Asia andthe Pacific. FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific. RAPPublication 2004/25. 53 pp.

3 Butcher, J.G. 2004. The Closing of the Frontier: A Historyof the Marine Fisheries of Southeast Asia c.1850-2000.Modern Economic History of Southeast Asia, Institute ofSoutheast Asian Studies, Singapore, 442 pp.

4 MRAG. 2005. Review of Impacts of Illegal, Unreportedand Unregulated Fishing on Developing Countries, SynthesisReport. Marine Resources Assessment Group, for the UKDepartment of International Development, London. 17 pp.

5 This is based on annual catches for the region of 45 milliontonnes together with an average price of US$0.80/kg and anannual loss of 16 percent of catch value, as estimated byMRAG (2005).

6 DFID. 2005. Proceedings of an International Workshopon Impacts of Illegal Unreported and Unregulated Fishing onDeveloping Countries, 16th to 17th June 2005, London. UKDepartment for International Development (DFID) andNorwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD).

5. Selected issues facing fisheries and aquaculture in Asia andthe Pacific

5.1 Illegal, unreported and unregulated(IUU) fishing in the Asia-Pacific region1

Background

The Asia-Pacific region is a major world producerof fish and fisheries products and, in 2004, theregion produced almost 50 percent of the world’stotal fish catch from capture fisheries and about90 percent of global aquaculture production, withmuch of this coming from the four major producers:China, India, Thailand and Indonesia. However, inrecent years, there has been a general trend in theregion of significant declines in coastal fisheryresources.2 Although increased aquacultureproduction has been proposed in many countriesof the region as a way of addressing decliningwild fish stocks, this may be difficult because muchof this aquaculture growth is currently dependenton the use of low value/trash fish derived fromwild stocks for feeding the cultured species,either directly or by its utilisation in processed fishmeal/oil.

Previous growth in production from wild marine fishstocks in the Asia-Pacific region, and particularlyin the Southeast Asia sub-region and APFICConvention Area, has been achieved not bysustainable, active management of stocks bycoastal States but, almost without exception, bya process of sequentially depleting wild fish stockswithin an essentially unregulated managementenvironment with fleets moved from one targetspecies to another and from one area to anotherto sustain landings.3 However, although thisprocess has fuelled the growth of fish productionin the Southeast Asia sub-region for the past150 years, it has now run its course since there arevirtually no new unexploited fish stocks or areasremaining within or outside the region that fishingfleets can move to. Therefore, the only way thatmarine fish landings (and aquaculture production,which depends on those landings) can bemaintained in the sub-region is for countries of the

sub-region, and of the Asia-Pacific more generally,to urgently move to more active managementof marine fish stocks to achieve long-termsustainability.

An important part of this essential move to bettermanagement of the region’s marine fisheries is toaddress the issue of illegal, unreported andunregulated (IUU) fishing. As coastal Statesdevelop new management regimes as well asfisheries management plans and regulations tomanage fish stocks under their jurisdiction for long-term sustainability, the issue of controlling IUUfishing becomes essential in achieving the aims ofthose management regimes, management plansand regulations.

The impact of current levels of IUU fishing withinthe Asia-Pacific region generally has not beenexplicitly estimated but it is certainly large andmulti-faceted and, like IUU fishing everywhere,involves both direct and indirect economic lossesand social impacts.4 Current annual economiclosses to the region could amount to aboutUS$5.8 billion annually,5 with this figure beingconsistent with the estimate made by DFID6 ofworldwide losses of US$4-9 billion as a result ofIUU fishing.

Clearly, the issue of IUU fishing is a major factorin the Asia-Pacific region and threatens not only thelong-term sustainability of fish stocks in the regionbut is currently imposing, and will impose in thefuture, significant economic and social costs to thecountries of the region.

This review examines the issues of IUU fishingin the Southeast Asia sub-region and APFICConvention Area in particular and more broadly inthe Asia-Pacific region, including the legislative and

47

7 Butcher, J.G. 2002. Getting into trouble: the Diasporaof Thai trawlers, 1975-2002. International Journal of MaritimeHistory, 14(2): 85-121.

8 Flewwelling, P., C. Cullinan, D. Balton, R. Sautter & J.E.Reynolds. 2003. Recent Trends in Monitoring, Control andSurveillance Systems for Capture Fisheries. Rome. FAOFisheries Tech. Pap. 415; 200 pp.

material capacity to combat the problem, andproposes recommendations for addressing what isprobably the greatest threat to fish stocks, fisheriesand those who depend on them that the region hasfaced.

What is IUU?

IUU fishing occurs at a number of levels within theAsia-Pacific region and the problems and theresponses needed to address each level varies.Three principal types of IUU fishing can beidentified:

� IUU fishing within a nation’s EEZ by nationalsof the coastal State. Such illegal fishing, byits very definition, is fishing contrary to thelaws of the coastal State and may involveusing illegal fishing gear, fishing in closedareas, fishing in closed seasons etc. Withgenerally open-access fisheries, inadequatemonitoring, control and surveillancecapabilities and division of regulatory powerbetween national, provincial and local levels,this type of illegal fishing is extremely commonin the countries of the region.

� IUU fishing by foreign vessels within anation’s EEZ. Such fishing not onlycontravenes the laws of the coastal State but,in some cases, also contravenes the laws ofthe flag State and perhaps internationalconventions and bi-lateral agreements. Withinthe Asia-Pacific region, this type of illegalfishing is also common. As an example of theextent of this type of IUU fishing in the region,the Foreign Ministry of Thailand estimated in1996 that a total of 3 889 Thai fishing vesselswere operating in the waters of other countries(mainly in Myanmar, Indonesia, Malaysia,Viet Nam, Bangladesh Cambodia, Brunei andIndia) but that only an estimated 1 079 of thesewere operating “legally”, while the other 2 810were operating “illegally”.7 In fact, the NationalDevelopment Plan of Thailand includesa provision for at least half of its productiontarget to come from other country’s EZZ,thereby implying a large degree of regionalcooperation in the form of access agreementsto make this IUU compliant.

� IUU fishing on the high seas. Since thedeclaration of 200 mile Exclusive EconomicZones (EEZs) by nations of the region, theextent of high seas area has shrunk

considerably, particularly in the Southeast Asiasub-region (Figure 1) where most waters arenow part of EEZs. Therefore, the opportunityto fish in high seas areas is limited inSoutheast Asia, although areas such as theIndian Ocean still have significant high seasareas (Figure 34). Apart from the IndianOcean Tuna Commission (IOTC) and theWestern and Central Pacific FisheriesCommission (WCPFC), both of which arespecies-focussed, there are no RegionalFisheries Management Organizations in thearea that have a co-ordinating managementrole for these high seas areas in theAsia-Pacific, which are, as a consequence,unregulated.

Given the above considerations, anecdotalevidence3, 8 not surprisingly shows that, withinthe Southeast Asian sub-region and also theAsia-Pacific region generally, by far the mostcommon form of IUU fishing is that which occurswithin the EEZs of countries of the regions(both by nationals and by other flag States) andtherefore within national jurisdictions. Thewillingness, legislative capability, operationalcapability and governance structures of nationalfisheries jurisdictions are therefore of paramountimportance in addressing IUU fishing in the region.This is in contrast to many other regions of theworld, where the focus of IUU fishing has been onhigh seas’ issues.

IUU fishing issues in the Asia-Pacific region

The genesis of IUU fishing in the region

The common occurrence of IUU fishing in theregion has its origin in four separate, butinter-related, factors:

(i) an historical lack of management of fishingcapacity at the national level which hasresulted, in most countries of the region, inlevels of fishing capacity far in excess of thatneeded to exploit the fisheries resources oftheir EEZs in a sustainable way;

(ii) government subsidies, particularly in theSoutheast Asia sub-region, for the building oflarge offshore vessels (Butcher, 2004), mostoften motivated by a desire to shift fishingefforts out of inshore coastal waters;

48

Figure 34Asia-Pacific region showing the high seas areas in the Pacific and Indian Oceans and nationalExclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) and Territorial Seas. Note that the boundaries of EEZs are forillustrative purposes only and do not represent precise boundaries or claim.

High Seas – Pacific Ocean

High Seas – Indian Ocean

EEZ areas & Territorial Seas

49

(iii) generally weak governance structuresand monitoring, control and surveillancecapabilities at the national level to deter illegalfishing; and

(iv) the lack of a regional fisheries managementorganization to coordinate sustainableexploitation of species (many of which,particularly in Southeast Asia, cross nationalboundaries) and to address issues ofmanagement of high seas areas, other thantuna.

National legislative and governance issues

The provisions of fisheries legislation in15 countries of the Asia-Pacific region (including13 APFIC members) were examined and severalimportant points were immediately apparent:

� Regulations relating to foreign fishing withina nation’s EEZ differ markedly betweencountries, despite many stocks being sharedbetween countries of the region. Theserange from a complete ban on foreign fishing(e.g. Philippines, Thailand) to joint venturearrangements (India, Sri Lanka) to seeminglyflexible arrangements requiring only the issueof a license to a foreign vessel (e.g. Myanmar).

� While some countries (e.g. Japan, Thailand,Indonesia etc) require permits from nationalauthorities for national vessels to undertakeforeign fishing, only two (Papua New Guineaand Viet Nam) make it an offence undernational legislation for national vessels to fishillegally in either another country’s EEZ or onthe high seas.

� 44 percent of the countries examined havethe legislative capacity to limit license numbersof national fishers within their EEZ. The other56 percent of countries do not havethe legislative capacity to limit the number oflicenses and therefore cannot, legislatively,limit fishing capacity within their EEZs.

� 69 percent of the countries examined havelegislation which either allows or mandates adual- or multi-layered system of managementwith management and other functions able tobe carried out at the national, provincial,district or village level. Not all of the countriesthat implement such a multi-layered systemappear to have legislative coordinatingmechanisms in place to ensure nationalconsistency in management measures.

� Although many stocks cross nationalboundaries, there is no regional fisheriesorganization that can coordinate managementmeasures across jurisdictions, including highseas areas.

In brief, therefore, capacity to mange IUU in marinefisheries in the region is seriously uncoordinatedand fragmented at both the national and regionallevel.

International agreements and arrangements

In addition to the management of fisheriesresources (including foreign fishing activities)within national EEZs through national legislation,there are also a range of international agreements,arrangements and treaties in place which set outconditions of access for foreign fishing fleets tonation’s EEZs. The majority of these arrangementsare bi-lateral agreements although there is noformal mechanism in place for coordinating suchinstruments between countries.

Countries of the Asia-Pacific region (in particular,those of the Southeast Asia sub-region), generallyhave not supported international and regionalmulti-lateral initiatives to coordinate issuesof management, access arrangements andmonitoring control and surveillance of fisheries.Only 12 percent of the region’s countries examinedhave signed the UN Straddling Stocks Agreement,only 19 percent have signed the FAO ComplianceAgreement and less than 10 percent havedeveloped a national plan of action to combat IUUfishing. Even less have been able to implementthese agreements and plans (see capacity toaddress IUU fishing, below).

Countries of the region therefore rely on nationallegislation (which, as indicated above, is ofteninadequate) and bi-lateral arrangements, which arenot coordinated regionally, to regulate access totheir EEZs.

In contrast, and as an example of what can beachieved through coordinated multi-lateral action,countries of the western Pacific9 have developedcoordinating mechanisms, often through the ForumFisheries Agency, to regulate access almost all ofwhich undertaken by foreign fleets, to their large

9 These include Federated States of Micronesia, Kiribati,Marshall Islands, Papua New Guinea, Nauru, Palau and theSolomon Islands.

50

EEZs and for managing fishing of the tuna stockswithin these EEZs.

Capacity to address IUU fishing

Apart from legislative issues, the issue of illegalfishing within and outside a nation’s EEZ is alsoimpacted by the monitoring, compliance andsurveillance (MCS) capabilities of the coastalState to enforce legislation. Such capabilitiesincreasingly involve self-regulation and community-based participation through a co-managementapproach, which involves a partnership betweengovernment and stakeholders in managinga fishery.

Within the Asia-Pacific region, the capabilitiesfor effective MCS vary widely.10 Monitoringcapabilities are generally poorly developed in theregion, particularly in Southeast Asia. Controlcapabilities also vary widely with, for example,some countries having no capacity to control IUUfishing while a number of countries, includingPakistan, India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Myanmar,Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, Republic of Koreaand Malaysia, have fully or partially implementedVMS systems for monitoring foreign and nationalvessel activities within their EEZs.

Surveillance capabilities in the countries of theregion are generally inadequate and involve the useof both voluntary compliance initiatives (which areoften the most common form of surveillanceactivity and include education and co-managementprogrammes) and limited deterrent or enforcementapproaches.

All the available evidence would therefore seem topoint towards a generally ineffective deterrent andenforcement capability11 both for domestic and forforeign fishing vessels, resulting in low levels ofcompliance with fisheries management regulations.

In contrast, the countries of the Western Pacificgenerally have a well coordinated and effectiveMCS system which supports harmonized andcoordinated legislation. These MCS activities12

(Anon, 2003) are coordinated through the ForumFisheries Agency (FFA) and stem from internationalagreements between the countries of the region.13

They include a regional register of foreign fishingvessels, uniform vessel identification, catch andposition reporting, trans-shipment reporting,placing of observers on foreign vessels, aerialsurveillance and the use of VMS.

As a result of this well coordinated regionalapproach to MCS activities, fisheries administratorsare confident that compliance rates with fisheriesregulations in the region are high (Anon, 2003) and,consequently, the fish stocks of this sub-region(particularly tuna) are being effectively managed forlong-term sustainability than in others. This doesnot imply that there are no problems in thesub-region, but they are under closer scrutiny andpressure from other countries to change theirpractices.

Addressing IUU fishing issues in the Asia-Pacificregion

In addressing the issues of IUU fishing in theregion, the key factors that have been responsiblefor generating the problem need to be addressedif long-term and sustainable solutions are to befound. These key factors include:

Over-capacity of national fishing fleets

As perhaps the prime driver of both overexploitationof resources in national EEZs and of IUU fishingboth within national EEZs and within the EEZs ofother nations, this issue must be addressed at thenational level and preferably coordinated regionally.Some countries, such as China, have made a starton what is often a difficult and painful process.However, around 60 percent of the countries of theregion do not even have the legislative capacity tolimit, let alone reduce, fishing capacity. Somemeasures such as an immediate cessation ofsubsidization of the conversion to, or building of,“offshore” fishing vessels should be used to reducethe rate of growth of national fleets while othermore difficult measures, such as changinglegislation and limiting and reducing the number ofvessels, should be put in place in the longer-term.14

Putting in place an effective capacity reduction10 Flewwelling, P. 2000. Fisheries Management and MCS in

South Asia: Comparative Analysis. FAO/FISHCODE Project,GCP/INT/648/NOR. FAO Rome. 56 pp.11 For example, Butcher (2002) has estimated that, in any one

year, only about 10 percent of Thai trawlers who are operatingillegally are apprehended.12 Anon. 2003. Regional MCS: The South Pacific Forum

Fisheries Agency Experience in Flewwelling, P. et al. 2003.Recent Trends in Monitoring, Control and SurveillanceSystems for Capture Fisheries. Rome. FAO Fisheries Tech.Paper 415; 151-162.

13 The Niue Treaty on Co-operation in Fisheries Surveillanceand Law Enforcement (1992) and the Palau Arrangement forManagement of the Western Pacific Purse Seine Fisheries(1992).14 Although it is understandable that individual Sates wish

to be part of the lucrative off-shore fishing, subsidization ofthis expansion at the global and regional level will becounter-productive in the longer term.

51

programme is an essential step in most countries,noting, however, that this is a long-term project andis likely to extend over several decades.

Regional cooperation and regional fisheriesmanagement organizations

Although the issues tend to be national in origin,the IUU issues in the Asia-Pacific region will notbe addressed until there is some agreementamong countries to cooperate, either bilaterally orsub-regionally. This should involve a review of thefisheries management capacity and commitment tosustainable fisheries, followed by agreements andcommitment to change and enhanced efforts tochange and improve the situation. IUU, especiallyissues of encroachment into the EEZs of othercounties and high seas issues, will requireextensive consultation and dialogue in order toreach agreed solutions.

Many benefits can be achieved by reducing IUUfishing, including the obvious benefits of increasedcatches and profit, increased support forsustainable livelihoods and improved contributionof fisheries to sustainable benefits. Other benefitscould include improved safety at sea as well asregional security through rapid vessel identificationand vessel monitoring.

In many other parts of the world, regional fisheriesmanagement organizations often provide a forumfor these consultations. While the Indian OceanTuna Commission (IOTC) has managementresponsibility for tuna stocks within its regionand the Western and Central Pacific FisheriesCommission (WCPFC) has responsibility formanagement of highly migratory species in theWestern and Central Pacific, there is no regionalfisheries management organization withresponsibility for management and coordination offisheries issues that brings together differentcountries in sub-regions of the Asia-Pacific region.Since (i) many, if not most, stocks are sharedbetween countries of the region, (ii) nationalfisheries management practices and capabilitiesare often not fully effective and (iii) the size andscope of IUU fishing in the region is large, theestablishment of such a management body couldbring significant benefits.

Governance and national legislation

As the basis for long-term sustainability of fishstocks, good legislation and governance structuresare essential for effective fisheries management.However, around 70 percent of the countries

examined have legislation that allows fisheriesmanagement to occur at national, provincial,district and/or village levels, often without any clearlegislated coordination mechanisms.

Some countries of the region (e.g. Viet Nam,Cambodia) are in the process of reviewing theirlegislation but even newer legislation (e.g.Indonesia, 2004) often is not based on theconcepts of the sustainable development of fishstocks and still does not contain provisions toaddress key issues such as over-capacity. Areview, preferably coordinated regionally, ofnational fisheries legislation in the region istherefore needed. FAO has worked with individualcountries in developing a better legislative basis formanagement and could conceivably provide thecoordination in approach that is needed.

Monitoring, control and surveillance capabilities fornational fleets and for foreign fishing activities

While countries of the Western Pacific haveachieved a well-coordinated and generally effectiveMCS capability for foreign fishing, compliancerates with national legislation and regulationsare low in the Asia-Pacific region, especially inSoutheast Asia. The low compliance rates stemfrom (a) “open access” fisheries in which socialobjectives override those pertaining to sustainableuse; (b) generally poor, and often difficult to access,statistical data bases and intelligence on vessels,landings, fishing gear type etc, at both the nationaland regional level; (c) control mechanisms which,although addressing individual issues such asprohibited fishing gear etc, are not coordinated andfocused to achieve, preferably through fisheriesmanagement plans, specific outcomes such assustainable fisheries; and (d) under-investment indeterrent and enforcement capabilities althoughvoluntary compliance initiatives, such aseducational programmes and co-managementinitiatives are well developed in most countries.Since MCS activities need to support effectivelegislation, the shortcomings of existing MCSsystems need to be addressed together with anylegislative review processes (see above).

Commitment to international initiatives to controlIUU fishing

While there is general support in the Asia-Pacificregion for regional fisheries managementorganizations, particularly the Indian Ocean TunaCommission (IOTC) and the Western and CentralPacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC), countriesof the region have been less enthusiastic in

52

supporting multi-lateral international initiatives toaddress IUU fishing. States of the Asia-Pacificregion should therefore be encouraged to supportsuch initiatives, for example by becomingsignatories to the UNCLOS Straddling StocksAgreement and the UN Compliance Agreementand developing national plans of action to combatIUU fishing in support of the International Plan ofAction.

An important issue which also needs to beaddressed in most countries, second only tocompliance with their own national fisherieslegislation, is commitment to have national fleetsobey the fishing rules and regulations of othernations and of international agreements. At thepresent time, only two countries of the region makeit an offence under national legislation for theirvessels to fish illegally in another country. Theinclusion of such provisions into national legislationof other countries would send a clear message tonational fleets that their governments supportinternational initiatives to address IUU fishing.

Conclusions

With its origins in generally unregulated and openaccess national fisheries, IUU fishing in theAsia-Pacific region is now a major issue, costingthe nations of the region an estimated US$5.8billion annually, threatening the long-termsustainability of regional fish stocks and leading tosocial consequences that impact on all coastalcommunities in the region.

The declaration of national EEZs has resulted in theseas of the region coming increasingly undernational jurisdiction, particularly in Southeast Asiawhere the extent of high seas areas is limited(Figure 34). This means that the solution to theissue of IUU fishing in the region lies with nationalgovernments although regional cooperation andcoordination is essential.

This report has identified a number of factorsthat are contributing to the problem of IUUfishing. Perhaps the most important issue is theover-capacity of the region’s fishing fleets whichhas contributed significantly to overexploitation ofstocks within national EEZs and has fuelled thedevelopment of offshore fishing fleets which havecontributed to the region’s IUU problems. Thesenew national fleets are often justified on the basisthat they will displace IUU vessels, but history hasshown that this seldom works. However, manycountries of the region lack the legislative ability to

address this over-capacity issue although somesteps, such as re-examining subsidies, can betaken immediately.

Separate management responsibility for fisheriesat the national and provincial level can, and has,contributed significantly to the over-capacityproblem, particularly when the linkages betweennational policies and local action are weak.

In the longer term, fishing capacity in the region willneed to be reduced and, in many countries, this willbe a long and often painful process. However, thepain and the economic losses of not reducingfishing capacity are much greater.

This report therefore recommends that nationalgovernments review their fisheries legislation toensure that it contains the ability to limit and reducefishing capacity and then assess what level ofcapacity is appropriate15 and how capacityadjustments can be made. Such assessments areoften best incorporated into specific fisheriesmanagement plans which can also address MCScapabilities needed to implement the plans.

Regional coordination and cooperation will benecessary in addressing national fisheries andIUU issues, and regional management of fishstocks will also be required in the long-term.Therefore, it is also recommended that, to achievethis, investigations be commenced with the aim ofestablishing a regional fisheries managementorganization that would bring together the nationsof the region.

Without addressing the issue of IUU fishing asa major part of a move towards sustainablemanagement of fisheries, the future for fisheries inthe region is not good. As other jurisdictionsaddress IUU fishing, the large foreign fleets of manyof the region’s nations will increasingly have theirIUU fishing activities curtailed and access to otherfisheries restricted. This could conceivably resultin a return of those vessels to the region, puttingadditional pressure on national fisheries andcoastal fish stocks.

15 Accurate estimates of “optimal” fishing capacity are notrequired before action is taken. The process should be startedas soon as possible and fine-tuned as knowledge of the fishstocks and the vessel capacity improves through effectivemonitoring of the reduction.

53

Addressing of IUU fishing by the nations of theregion is therefore a process that begins at home,at the national level. By strengthening nationallegislation, committing to sustainable managementof fish stocks within a country’s EEZ, developmentof national plans of action, reducing fishingcapacity to appropriate levels, implementingeffective MCS systems and supporting internationalinitiatives to address IUU fishing, a start can bemade on better overall regional management of fishstocks, including the important IUU fishing issuesthat currently face the region.

5.2 Seafood quality and safety in thecontext of trade

Background

Fish products are a heavily traded commodity.About 38 percent of global fish output by liveweight enters international marketing channels forexport. Overall, Asia is a net importer of fish(by value) although many States are net exporters(see Chapter 1 for more details).

There is considerable import of low value fishproducts and an export flow of higher value fishproducts in the Asian region.16 With continuingdevelopment of economies in the region, anincrease in the trade flows of fisheries andaquaculture products within the region can beexpected. There will be increasing attention on thequality and safety of these products.

The increasing trade of fisheries and aquacultureproducts and related focus on food safety isleading to more testing of foods, both for exportoutside of the region and within the region. Thisis accompanied by increasingly stringent measuresfor ensuring safety of food with improved hygieneand freedom from residues and contaminants.Whilst the earlier focus of improving the quality andsafety of products has been on the processing andexporting part of the sector, there is now increasingattention being given to the methods of production,both in capture fisheries and aquaculture.

Asian exporting countries are now expected tomeet the standards set by importers andconsumers both within and outside the region.Meeting these expectations is crucial for bothproducers and processors to remain competitivewithin domestic and international markets.

There is also an increasing trend in rejectionsassociated with detection of chemical residuesand microbiological-associated safety problemsresulting from the increasing volume of exportedproducts and increasingly stringent importrequirements (Table 30).

Asia has the most number of border rejection casesin the EU, varying from 50 to 75 percent of the totalborder cases each year. This is also true in termsof tonnes.

The number of detention and rejection cases fromAsia is also increasing.17 In 2005, notificationsconcerning residues of veterinary medicalproducts in fish products increased by morethan 50 percent. The trend in 2005 was thatthe detections of the use of Malachite Greenwere significantly on the rise and this was alsothe case for detections of carbon monoxidetreatment.18

Because of their longer history of internationaltrade, capture fishery products have a longerhistory of attention with respect to food safety. Thequality of capture fishery products also respondedwell to simple interventions such as better on boardhandling, clean ice and on-board hygiene, as wellas improved management within dockside andprocessing facilities.

Improving the quality and safety of aquacultureand fishery products and reducing risks toecosystems and human health from residues andmicrobiological contaminations have now becomeboth an integral part of post-harvest handling andalso pre-harvest management.

Main food safety issues

As importing countries and their consumers andregulators are becoming more concerned aboutresidues and quality, attention is shifting to the wayfish is produced. In aquaculture this includes theinputs used, where they came from, social aspectsrelated to other coastal stakeholders and the waythat animals and plants are produced. In capturefisheries the emphasis is also shifting towards thesourcing of uncontaminated fish (e.g. younger fish).

Pre-harvest food safety is less of an issue incapture fisheries since the fish are not fed ormanaged as a captive stock (i.e. no inputs are

16 WorldFish Center, 2003.

17 FAO, Fisheries Technical Paper 473, 2005.18 EU, RASSF Annual Report, 2005.

54

used). However, fish may still originate fromenvironments which have chemical or biologicalcontaminations (e.g. red tide toxins, chemicalpollution, sewage/effluent contamination andatmospheric pollution). It is essential to ensurethat foods for human consumption are free fromexcesses of harmful or undesirable chemicals,harmful pathogens and resistant microorganism’sbacteria and parasites.

Increasing calls for total traceability of foodproducts are also affecting the food productionindustry such that consumers can be assured thatthe product has been produced without the use oftransgenic technologies, without addition ofundesirable or harmful chemicals or additives, andthat all of the environments and ecosystemsaffected by the production facilities have not beencompromised in any way.

Chemical contamination and residues

Risks from chemicals come from chemicals appliedto aquaculture production or contaminants foundin water. In aquaculture it is also important that theenvironment surrounding the production facility isprotected from the negative effects of the use ofchemicals.

It is important that governments from producing/exporting countries support their ministries anddepartments working on food safety to strengthenthe capacity at national and local levels to preventand control the use of chemicals, includingantimicrobials, and in general to ensure chemicaland microbiologically safe products.

Even though rules and regulations are beingimproved and implemented, there are stilloccasional cases of the use of banned chemicals

and drugs such as chloramphenicol, nitro-furansand malachite green. This can have hugerepercussions from a marketing point of view. Inaddition to food safety risks associated withconsumption of products containing antimicrobialresidues, it is likely that importing countries in thenear future will begin screening imported foods forpresence as well as levels of resistant bacteria(total bacteria and specific pathogens).

Chemical contamination of fishery products is anissue in some fisheries.20 Examples of concern arethe presence of dioxins residues in some fisheryproducts (due to atmospheric pollution of waters),and mercury accumulation. In many cases thelevels present in fish are tolerable at normal dietaryintake levels, emphasizing the importance of properscientific studies of risk associated with theconsumption of contaminated food products.

Fish borne zoonoses

Fish borne zoonotic parasites are an importantproblem related to local/domestic consumption ofraw or inadequately cooked fish. Increasingevidence from countries in the region show thatdifferent types of zoonotic parasites arewidespread in freshwater fish species. This groupof parasites is of particular health importance inSoutheast Asia and is associated with differenttypes of liver cancer. Humans are infected whenconsuming raw or otherwise inadequately prepareddishes. Currently, parasitological examination offisheries products are mainly done by visualinspection, e.g. of fillets. However, with ananticipated increase in the export of fresh and liveaquatic organisms, it is likely that importingauthorities will begin testing imported foods forpresence of zoonotic parasites.

Table 30Number of rejections at the border of the European Union from 1999-200219

Contamination Origin 1999 2000 2001 2002

Chemical Asia 19 12 49 232

Other 13 20 19 47

Micro-Biological Asia 49 63 54 86

Other 41 46 30 46

Other causes Asia 3 4 8 9

Other 2 7 14 9

19 Adapted from: FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 473,“Causes of detentions and rejections in international fishtrade”. 20 FAO, SOFIA 2004.

55

Microbiological contamination

Food safety issues also rise from the contaminationof filter-feeders molluscs which filter large volumesof water daily to obtain food. Any pathogenpresent in such water will be accumulated in themolluscs. Food safety concerns are particularlyhigh for molluscs consumed raw or inadequatelyheat treated. Mollusc culture is often located inareas (e.g. coastal) of high faecal and chemicalpollution mainly through discharge of wastewaterfrom urban and industrial areas. Thailand, Malaysiaand Indonesia have permits from the EU to exportlive molluscs.21

Main trade issues

Since the 1990’s two main regulatory agreements– Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)and Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) havebeen implemented through the WTO (World TradeOrganization).

Sanitary and phytosanitary measures

SPS measures are made to ensure that a importingcountry’s consumers are being supplied with foodthat is safe by the standards the importing countryconsiders appropriate but they are at the same timemade so the exporting country can ensure thatstrict health and safety regulations are not beingused as an excuse for protecting domesticproducers (WTO, 2006).

Technical barriers to trade

The number of different regulations and standardsmakes life difficult for producers and exporters. Ifregulations are set arbitrarily without internationallyagreed guidance for setting standards, they couldbe used as an excuse for protectionism. TheAgreement on Technical Barriers to Trade tries toensure that regulations, standards, testing andcertification procedures do not create unnecessaryobstacles (WTO, 2006).

Many APFIC member countries are required tokeep abreast of requirements of SPS and TBT inorder to ensure no or minimal loss due to lostexport opportunities. There has already beensignificant progress in successful implementationof HACCP (Hazard Analyses and Critical ControlPoint) at the seafood processing level but dueto consumer demand and a maturing and

development of the sector there is now also a needto look at the full production chain (pre-harvest).

Transparency and traceability are key words for thefuture production of seafood products.

Traceability

The global emerging trends in terms of traceabilityand labeling are requiring countries to moreeffectively monitor the origin and disposal of fisherycatches and farm of origin of aquaculture products.In order to effectively track handling through themarket chain, there is increasing pressure for theintroduction of certification of products.

Product labeling is also becoming increasinglyimportant as a means to effectively track productsthrough the market chain as well as a means toinform the consumer.

Supermarket influence on trade

The emergence of large supermarket retail chains/companies has had a significant impact on thedemand for seafood in European and NorthAmerican import markets and to a lesser extentin Asia and elsewhere (although this influenceis rapidly increasing with the rapid rate ofurbanization in Asia). With their significant buyingpower and forward contracts, supermarkets areable to make significant demands on producerswith respect to the quality and characteristics ofthe product they intend to purchase.

Supermarkets are able to use market forces todemand certain quality criteria and even social,ethical and environmental quality assurancesthat may not be required under any national orinternational regulation or measure (or may bemore stringent than existing measures). In thisrespect, supermarkets are effectively determiningtheir own quality standards. There is a strong casefor effective information exchange to informsupermarket decision-making, as they are currentlyhighly receptive to consumer demands and theseare influenced through a wide range of media.Therefore, “getting the story straight” is important,particularly with respect to environmental andsocially related quality considerations since inmany cases these are highly subjective or locallyspecific.

Good examples of this are over-generalizations asto the manner of production of farmed shrimp, orthe effects of trawling on fisheries. Good and bad21 Deboyser, 2006.

56

examples can be found in each instance but it isnot possible to state whether these activities areuniversally acceptable or not.

The conclusion is that supermarkets are, in effect,acting as a labeling scheme themselves (i.e. theirbrand name and statements about their own qualitystandards effectively become the assurance to theconsumer on a wide range of quality issues). It istherefore essential that there is effective dialogueover what constitutes reasonable standards.

Guidelines on ecolabelling like the FAO Guidelinesfor the ecolabelling of fish and fishery productsfrom marine capture fisheries,22 codes of practiceand better management principles like theInternational Principles for Responsible ShrimpFarming can be effective starting points ininitiating and taking forward this dialogue betweenproducers, buyers and other stakeholders and toprovide the adequate reassurances on both sidesthat unreasonable demands or expectations byeither party can be avoided.

Improved pre-harvest management

The need to improve the pre-harvest managementof aquaculture and capture fishery products is nowleading towards improved production systems andmeasurable systems for monitoring complianceand assurance of quality and safety.

The introduction of such systems is a challenge tothe Asian region which represents the greatestdiversity of production systems, species andmarket requirements. This diversity is the greatstrength of Asian fisheries and aquaculture but alsopresents challenges to the systematic managementand monitoring of production. It is now clear thatonly parts of the sector will respond to market andconsumer demands, however, these are acting aspilots for potential broader application.

Improving pre-harvest management in aquaculture

In aquaculture systems, the increasing need foreffective management of pre-harvest food safetyrequires considerable capacity building andawareness raising for government and industrystakeholders dealing with those concerned with

pond level management (i.e. farm managers,farmers, service providers).

In response to the demands for more effectivepre-harvest management, there is now emergingso-called “better management practices” (BMPs)which focus on improving production methods(from the perspective of hygiene, food safety aswell as environmental and even ethical and animalwelfare aspects).

22 Guidelines for Ecolabelling of Fish and Fishery Productsfrom Marine Capture Fisheries, Rome, FAO, 2005. 90 p.23 FAO/NACA/UNEP/World Bank/WWF 2006. International

Principles for Responsible Shrimp Farming. Network ofAquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific (NACA) Bangkok,Thailand. 20 p.

Aquaculture Certification Schemes

Certification of aquaculture products are rather newbut are developing fast. There are already a numberof certification schemes present. The differentcertifications relate to environmental and sociallyresponsible aquaculture and to some extend alsoto food safety and quality of the end product.Examples of the certification schemes are givenbelow:

Food Quality Certification

� Aquaculture Certification Council (Global)Website: www.aquaculturecertification.org

� EUREP GAP (Global)Website: www.eurep.org

� Scottish Quality Salmon (National)Website: www.scottishsalmon.uk

� Thai Quality Shrimp (National)Website: www.thaiqualityshrimp.com

Better Management Practices

� FAO/WB/NACA/UNDP/WWFShrimp Consortium (Global)Website: www.enaca.orgWebsite: www.worldwildlife.org

Organic Certification

� Naturland (Global)Website: www.naturland.de

� IFOAM (Global)Website: www.ifoam.org

� Soil Association (National)Website: www.soilassociation.org

� Bio Swiss (National)Website: www.bio-suisse.ch

� Canadian Organic Aquaculture (National)Website: www.certifiedorganic.bc.ca

� BioGro New Zealand (National)Website: www.biogro.co.nz

Other Certification

� Carrefour (Retailer)Website: www.carrefour.com

� Wal-Mart (Retailer)Website: www.wal-mart.com

23

57

To improve food safety in aquaculture, newapproaches to farming are required, with farmersworking together with food safety experts todevelop systems for farming aquatic animals thatassure food safety. This is particularly importantfor Asian species destined for international trade,such as shrimp and high value finfish.

It is also important for more domestically orientedproducts like carps, tilapia and other freshwaterfish. Internationally accepted, science basedquality control mechanisms, such as riskassessment and HACCP and Good HygienicPractice (GHP), will become essential requirementsfor trading in aquaculture products.

Whilst BMPs target better production methods,they are not guarantees of food safety andthere is a need to better understand food safetyat the production level in order to developthese management practices and address therequirements for food safety of importing marketsand consumers. Important lessons on food safetyfrom the processing industry can potentially beadjusted and applied to the farm level.

Whilst much of the market pressure comes fromimporting countries, there is also an increasingtrend of domestic demand, fuelled largely bysupermarkets and their sourcing and marketingstrategies, which are focusing on sustainablefisheries and aquaculture.

Certification schemes for aquaculture products area relatively recent development and are linkedstrongly to codes of practice and principles.

The proliferation of codes and schemes doespresent the risk of confusing consumers overlabeling and what exactly the product they arepurchasing is being certified for. Some certificationschemes cover the food safety and general foodquality aspect of the product, whilst othersoffer broader assurances related to minimizedenvironmental impact, ethical production andadherence to specific production protocol (e.g.compliance to organic production principles orstated codes of practice).

Monitoring of these schemes and how productsare certified or de-certified is also an area ofconsiderable diversity. There are examples ofindustry self-regulation, government certificationof the national industry standard and thirdparty schemes where independent monitoringis undertaken.

The credibility of the various forms of certificationis therefore different and also sensitive to publicperception of integrity and independence of thecertifier or self-certifier.

Improving pre-harvest safety in fisheries production

Capture fishery certification schemes have largelyfocused on more environmental impacts of fisheriesand their mitigation.

Some schemes have also included animal welfareor conservation related elements (such as gearsor fishing techniques which minimize by-catch);other schemes focus on broader sustainablemanagement principles. Aspects of food safetyare less involved and would be covered underHACCP based schemes for on board handling.

Fisheries Certification Schemes

Certification of Fisheries has been developed forlonger than aquaculture schemes. There area number of good and already tested certificationschemes available for fisheries. Some of the largerfisheries certification schemes are given below:

Ethical/Environmental Certification

Marine Stewardship Council (Global)Website: www.msc.org

Marine Aquarium Council (Global)Website: www.aquariumcounsil.org

“Dolphin Safe” Tuna Label (Global)Website: www.earthisland.org

Other Certification

Carrefour “Peche Responsible”Website: www.carrefour.com

Unilever Fish Sustainability InitiativeWebsite: www.unilever.com

58

Opportunities and limitations of HACCP

HACCP and the ideas behind HACCP have beenimplemented in seafood processing for a long time.The seafood processing industry was actuallyamong the first food processing industries toimplement HACCP. There seem to be goodopportunities to combine better managementpractices (with focus on production) with theideas of HACCP (with focus only on food safety).HACCP ideas could be used as part of BMPsdirectly related to food safety.

There are limitations in using HACCP at pre-harvestlevel. As noted in the FAO/NACA/WHO report onFood Safety Issues Associated with Products fromAquaculture (1997) there are difficulties in usingthe HACCP approach on small-scale farms. Thisis also recognized in the discussions and in thefinal report from the Twenty-seventh Session of theCodex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products

(2005). The Code states that it is not intended tocover extensive fish farming systems that prevailin many developing countries or integratedlivestock and fish culture systems. Many of thesesystems do however produce products that aretraded internationally.

It is possible that some of the ideas in HACCP canbe combined with BMP’s schemes that not onlytake food safety into account but also other farmmanagement procedures.

The conclusion is that food safety and theimplications it can have on both internationallytraded products and on domestically consumedproducts (public health) are already an issue in thefisheries sector, as in other food producing sectors,and it is likely to become an even more importantissue in the future both for processors as well asfor pre-harvest management.

59

6. Outlook for fisheries and aquaculture in Asia and the Pacific

relatively small, simple import substitutionscompensate for changes in the supply of fishmealor trash fish. In contrast, with intermediatedevelopment there is likely to be a shift to cultureof lower value species or lower intensity productionthat is less dependent on feed. With highlydeveloped aquaculture, there will be no escapefrom fishmeal and trash fish price increases. Theseincreases will result not only in impacts on fishprices and production, but will also have widerripple effects on national economies leading to fallsin incomes and consumption. Impacts will bemuch bigger for China but the scenario in China isvery likely to be a problem for other countries inthe region as their aquaculture sectors develop.

The study highlighted the importance ofmanagement of wild capture fisheries that includegreater consideration of low value fish. Thedevelopment of plant based substitutes for fishbased feeds should also be a top priority.

6.2 Unexploited fisheries

In response to declining inshore resources, manygovernments in the APFIC region are advocatinga policy of moving the fishing effort away fromthese coastal resources to potentially less exploitedones. However, this represents a continuation ofpast practices where, globally, a steady expansionof fishing from inshore local regions to furtheroffshore fishing grounds as the local stocksbecame depleted.

This move may have delayed the inevitablereduction in fishing capacity that the situationdictated as necessary, but it did not solve theproblem. As the offshore resources also becamemore depleted, these fleets either had to moveback inshore, thus aggravating the originalproblem, or move to some other part of the worldto fish. Increasing demand from the world to movetowards more responsible fisheries has resulted.

Despite this warning many States believe thatthere is still room to move outwards within theAsia-Pacific region and many States in the regioninclude further expansion into offshore fisheries aspart of their future fishery plans. Although thepotential is relatively unknown, especially indemersal stocks, it is dangerous to assume that theoffshore regions will supply fish in quantities thatwe are familiar with in inshore regions. It is wellknown that biological productivity declinesexponentially as one moves away from the coast.

6.1 Global and regional predictions

Predictions of future global trends were made bythe International Food Policy Research Institute incollaboration with the WorldFish Center (IFPR/WFC) – “Fish to 2020”.1 The study predicted thatproduction and consumption will continue toincrease in developing States, but slow down indeveloped States resulting in an increase in theprice of fish, especially fish meal and fish oil, wildfish, and high-value fish (assuming that consumerswill not greatly shift their preferences to othercommodities such as poultry as fish pricesincrease).

A Joint WorldFish Center/FAO study has furtherexamined supply and demand for fisheries in fiveAsian countries, based on a model derived fromthe WorldFish Asia-Fish model which has beenpreviously used to develop scenarios related tosupply and demand of fish in the Asian region. Themodel has been expanded to incorporate trade infish and fish products from capture fisheries forfeeds in aquaculture. The following scenarios wereanalysed:

� The effect of increases in the global price offishmeal as a result of reduction in globalsupply (e.g. cornering of the market, declinein the global fish meal fisheries yield)

� The effect of more local/regional declines insupply (from over-fishing, environmentalchanges, fuel price rises)

� The effect of technology in improving thequality of landed fish to make it moreacceptable as human food (e.g. through betteron board handling)

� The effect of improved feed usage and feedefficiency for aquaculture

The results of the modelling have shown that,under all scenarios, there will be differentialimpacts on poor consumers who will be hit by thelower availability of fish and higher prices. Asecond conclusion was that impacts of thescenarios differed depending on the stage ofa country’s aquaculture development. Whenaquaculture is in an early phase of developmentand the dependency on trash fish and fishmeal is

1 WorldFish Centre (IFPR/WFC) – “Fish to 2020”http://www.worldfishcenter.org/Pubs/fish-to-2020/fish-to-2020.htm

60

Of the 363 million km2 of ocean, in less than sevenpercent are waters with a depth of less than200 m, and this continental shelf area accounts for90 percent of the global fish catch. The rest comesfrom deep-water demersal fish and highly migratoryfish such as tuna that roam the vast desert-likeexpanse of the open ocean. It is unlikely that thispercentage will change dramatically over the next10-20 years.

There have been some resource surveys fordeep-water demersal fish in the region, inparticular, those done by India. The Fishery Surveyof India (FSI) is responsible for survey andassessment of marine fishery resources of theIndian EEZ. With its headquarters at Mumbai, theInstitute has seven operational bases at Porbandar,Mumbai, Mormugao and Cochin along the westcoast; Madras and Visakhapatnam along the eastcoast and Port Blair in the Andaman & NicobarIslands. A total of 12 ocean-going survey vesselshave been deployed for fisheries resourcessurvey and monitoring. At the time of writing, FAOdid not have access to these results. Experiencefrom other parts of the world, however, has shownthat many of the scarce deep water demersalstocks are long-lived (over 100 years) species oflow productivity and many have already beenoverexploited in many temperate waters. FAO’sFishery Committee of the Eastern Central Atlantic(CECAF) has just concluded that “Any exploitationof these (deep water) species should be carefullydesigned, taking into account the very low level ofsustainable yield of these fish populations and theisolation of sea-mount benthic ecosystems.”

In terms of the highly migratory tuna species,purse-seine fishery in the Western and CentralPacific (WCPO) has accounted for around55-60 percent of total catch in the area since theearly 1990s, with annual catches in the range of790 000-1 200 000 tonnes. The majority of theWCPO purse-seine catch (>70 percent) is taken bythe four main distant-water fishing fleets (Japan,Republic of Korea, Taiwan Province of China andUnited States of America), which currently numberaround 140 vessels.

There has been an increasing contribution from thegrowing number of Pacific Island domestic vesselsin recent years (40 vessels in 2000), with thebalance from Philippines fisheries and a variety ofother fleets, including a small seasonally activeSpanish fleet.

As shown in Chapter 3 (Table 17), the tunastocks in both the WCPO and in the Indian Ocean,

with the exception of skipjack, are all fully oroverexploited. Recent studies have also shownthat there is considerable overcapacity in the tunafleets in both these oceans.2 Assessments of thestocks in both the WCPO and the Indian Oceanalso highlight the variability in recruitment in thefaster growing more productive tuna species(skipjack and yellowfin), driven to a large extent byclimatic changes such as El Niño. Scientists warnthat because of the multi-species nature of thepurse seine and longline fishery, the impacts offishing on skipjack could have a negative impacton more vulnerable species. In this respect, theyadvise that the Tuna Commissions should considerhow to implement management measures toaddress over-fishing and alleviate over-fished stockconditions in the future. For APFIC Members thiswill mean increased competition for the totalallowable catch limits that are being imposed.

In summary, it would appear that any expansioninto offshore waters will be limited for both pelagicand demersal fisheries, unless more selectivefishing gears for tunas can be developed. Overall,therefore, even to maintain the status quo incapture fisheries in the region, especially in termsof providing food security and poverty alleviationfor the region’s poor, the many issues highlightedin this review will need to be addressed. It isunlikely that any State can do this unilaterally,and a concerted and collaborative effort will berequired.

6.3 Small-scale fisheries

All analyses point to the fact that excess fishingcapacity and fishing effort needs to be greatlyreduced.

The obvious dilemma in relation to reducingcapacity and fishing effort in the Asia-Pacific regionis that a large part of the production comes fromsmall-scale operators, and they are often totallydependent on fishery resources for their livelihood.Despite efforts to “modernize” small-scale fisheriesin the region, the level of small-scale fishingactivity has not decreased. Given the significantcontribution that small-scale fisheries make tofood security and poverty alleviation, the role ofsmall-scale fisheries and how they fit into themultiple activities of rural economies should becarefully re-examined. Unlike large-scale industrialfisheries, they have low visibility and receive littleattention from policy-makers. They are often open

2 Bayliff W.H, Moreno, Juan Ignacio de Leiva & Majkowski,J. (2005); Management of tuna fishing capacity: conservationand socio-economics. FAO Fisheries Proceedings 2.

61

access enterprises that contribute little to thenational GDP and command little political attentionand support through research, subsidies etc. Assuch, they tend to be dealt with through projectwork funded by donors.

Small-scale fisheries, however, have a very largepotential to improve the contribution that fisheriesas a whole make to sustainable development.Policies that support and foster small-scalefisheries, at the expense of more industrializedfisheries, have the advantage of providing bothsocial and economic benefits to a large numberof stakeholders in the APFIC region as wellas providing an important engine for wealthcreation. Including these stakeholders in fisheriesco-management is a positive step in this directionand APFIC has been providing considerablesupport in this endeavour.

The APFIC Regional Workshop on “Mainstreamingfisheries co-management”3 acknowledged thatco-management of fisheries is widely practicedin most Asian and Pacific countries, but notedthat these were mostly undertaken eitherthrough traditional arrangements or on a pilot/demonstration scale implemented throughprojects. These pilot/demonstration schemes haveshown that economic, social and environmentalbenefits can be achieved. Countries in Asia andthe Pacific are urged to move towards moreorganized implementation of co-management atlocal, provincial and national levels, i.e. they shouldmainstream fisheries co-management. Thisshould build on existing co-management andcommunity-based arrangements where available.

A number of challenges to successful main-streaming of co-management were highlightedwhich include poverty levels of fishers in theregion; limited communication of the benefits ofco-management; resource constraints; weakgovernance frameworks and poor institutionallinkages and, importantly, the lack of integrationof fisheries management with other policydevelopments such as decentralization and povertyreduction.

The workshop agreed on a number of strategiesand actions to facilitate the mainstreaming offishery co-management. These were:

� Demonstrate and communicate the benefitsand importance of co-management to promotethe scaling up of pilot/demonstration activities;

� Provide appropriate national policy andlegislative frameworks;

� Ensure legitimate representation of, and trustamong, stakeholders;

� Strengthen human/institutional capacity ofstakeholders to enable co-management;

� Empower fishing communities to engage inco-management;

� Establish, enhance and increase linkages andcommunication;

� Focus research and learning on fisheriesco-management; and

� Make available and support sustainablefinancial arrangements for fisheriesco-management.

6.4 Aquaculture

Since the yield from capture fisheries is notexpected to increase greatly, there is an emphasisbeing placed on the aquaculture sector’s ability toprovide increasing quantities of fish to satisfyincreasing demand in all regions.

Several conditions must be satisfied in order foraquaculture be able to achieve this expectation.The massive expansion of aquaculture required willneed increased production area, as well as greatlyincreased intensity of production. Obtaining theland and water may be possible if the value offishery products increases so that aquaculture canchallenge other production systems for the use ofthe feeds, land and water required to effect thisproduction. Alternatively, increased efficiency inthe use of water and intensified production willreduce land requirements. The current intensity ofproduction in many States of Asia is such that thereis considerable scope for increased production perunit area. However, this will result in increased feedusage and probable increased water requirements.

Strengthening of environmental regulations is alsodriving aquaculture to limit its effluent outputsand the improved environmental profile of parts ofthe sub-sector is also being driven by consumerdemands. Supermarkets are beginning to impactthe way aquaculture operates by requiring a rangeof ethical, environmental and food safety standardsto be met. This tends to focus on the export partof the sector, but domestic supermarkets are also

3 APFIC, 2005. APFIC Regional consultative workshop onmainstreaming fisheries co-management, Siem Reap,Cambodia, 9-12 August 2005. RAP Publication 2005/23.

62

becoming more particular, especially in terms offood safety and product quality.

The current reliance on fish meal as a proteinsource for aquaculture feeds is a major potentialconstraint. In looking at the increasing use of lowvalue/trash fish to feed the growth in aquaculture,APFIC convened a regional consultative workshopon “Low value and trash fish in the Asia-Pacificregion”.4 The main outcome of workshop was anaction plan that included:

� Applying a number of fishery managementinterventions (including reduction of trawlerand pushnetters capacity; improve gearselectivity, introduce more effective rightsbased-management; protection nursery areas;seek alternative employment options forfishers).

� Improving post-harvest interventions whichcould be used to improve the utilization of lowvalue/trash fish (improve on board handling,diversify product forms).

� Address demand for low value/trash fishby aquaculture by improving feeds foraquaculture through (changing over from directfeeding to pellet feeding; reduction of fish mealcontent by substitution of suitable ingredientsin pellets; investment in feed research forinland/marine species; and promote adoptionand change over to pellet feeds.

Aquaculture also currently competes with thelivestock sector for fish meal for feeds and we arelikely to see different outcomes of this competitiondepended on price of fish and the ability to becomeless reliant on fish as a feed input. This puts evenmore pressure on aquaculture to reduce its relianceon fish meals and increase the efficiency of theirutilization. Whilst more efficient use of fish mealis possible, reduced reliance may be more difficultto achieve. In the face of increasing purchasingpower of aquaculture feeds, it may be the livestocksector which makes the greater progress towardsreducing reliance on fish meals.

The efficient culture of herbivorous/omnivorous fishis already a reality; however, it is apparent thatcurrent trends indicate that aquaculture is movingtowards higher value species that present greaterprofit margins. This trend is even being seen inspecies that are traditionally considered to berelatively low input species such as tilapia. Theproduction of tilapia in several States is movingaway from greenwater fertilized systems towardspellet-fed intensified systems.

It is inevitable that as fish prices rise, there will bea tendency for poorer parts of national populationsto shift towards cheaper forms of meat such aschicken and pork. The question is whether fish inthe Asia-Pacific region will remain a common (andeven central) part of the diet of most people orincreasingly become a luxury food item.

4 APFIC, 2005. APFIC Regional workshop on low value and“trash fish” in the Asia-Pacific region. Hanoi, Viet Nam,7-9 June 2005. RAP Publication 2005/21.

ASIA-PACIFIC FISHERY COMMISSION

FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific

39 Phra Athit Road, Bangkok, Thailand

www.apfic.org

Documents

Status and potential of fisheries and aquaculture in … to...ASIA-PACIFIC FISHERY COMMISSION Status and potential of fisheries and aquaculture in Asia and the Pacific APFIC member