Seminar Report

UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENTS, RAJASTHAN
TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY, KOTA
SEMINAR REPORT
SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT OF
SEAFOOD
SUBMITTED BY : SOURABH SAGDEO(17/180)
SUBMITTED TO : Sh. GITESH VIJAY SIR
/21/2021
 CONTENT
S.NO. TITLE PAGE
NO.
1. Certificate 4
2. Acknowledgement 5
3. List of Figures 6
4. Abstract 7
5. Chapter 1: An Introduction to Seafood Supply 8
Chains
 Introduction
 Key Characteristics Of Wild Seafood
Supply Chains
6. Chapter 2: Literature review
 Overview 13
7. Chapter 3 : Seafood Supply Chain in INDIA 16

 Overview
 Categorization of Resources
 Production Trends
 Fresh Water Aquaculture
 Brackish Water Aquaculture
 Marine Fish Production
8. Chapter 4 : Structure of Seafood Supply Chain 24

 Basic Supply Chain
 Supply Chain For Domestic Markets
 Supply Chain For Exports
 Processing And Storage
 Supply Chain Attributes
9. Chapter 5 : Supply Chain Challenges 43

 The Challenges
10. Chapter 6 : Emerging Solutions And Strategies 52

 HACCP In Seafood Industry
| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 2

 HACCP Defined
 Block-Chain
 CONTENT
S.NO. TITLE PAGE

NO.
11. Chapter 07 : Conclusion 57
12. References 58

 CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that Mr.Sourabh Sagdeo, student of B.Tech (Mechanical
Engineering) VIIIth Semester has submitted his seminar entitled “Supply
Chain Management Of Seafood” under my guidance.
Sh.Gitesh Vijay
Assistant professor

 ACKNOWLEGEMNT
I am thankful to my college who gave me an opportunity to learn about
this new and useful Technology. This topic will be very beneficial for my
whole journey as a student because it will help me enhance my technical
knowledge and will teach the way how a big project starts with ideation
process and lead to the fabrication part. I express my gratitude to my
teacher “Sh. Gitesh Vijay Sir” for encouraging and helping me to take up
this challenging seminar topic of Supply Chain Management of Seafood. I
shall cherish this time.

 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Fishery Market
Figure 2: Imports and exports of fishery commodities (a) worldwide, by area of

the world, and by selected trading regions, three-year average, 1993-
1995
Figure 3: Fish Production in India (thousand tons)
Figure 4: Trends in Export of Seafood, 1951–2001 (compounded growth rates in

per cent)
Figure 5: Contribution of seafood to Indian Exports
Figure 6: Indian fishery resource (2013-14)
Figure 7: Share of Marine and Inland fish production in 1990-91 and 2013-14
Figure 8: Top 10 states in fish production (lakh MT) in India (2013-14)
Figure 9: Top 10 states in freshwater aquaculture (lakh MT) in India (2013-14)
Figure 10: State wise marine fish production (lakh MT) in India (2013-14 P)
Figure 11: Key Players in Domestic Fish Marketing in India
Figure 12: Expenditure Breakdown of an Average Fisherman.
Figure 13: Role of Supply Chain Actors.
Figure 14: Value Chain for Fisheries(Domestic)
Figure 15: Value Chain for Fisheries(Exports)
Figure 16: Distribution of Income in the Supply Chain (in per cent)
Figure 17: Processing and Storage Infrastructure in India
Figure 18: Region wise processing facility capacities.
Figure 19: Region wise storage capacities in MT
Figure 20: Marketing Channels
Figure 21: Top 6 Threats for Indian seafood Industry
Figure 22: Seafood trade transparency
Figure 23: Key Advantages of Block chain in Supply Chain Management

 ABSTRACT
This report studies the current state of the seafood supply chain in India.
The first section discusses seafood sustainability and continues with a brief
description of the Indian seafood industry. The second section studies the
stakeholders in the supply chain, their roles, income and social conditions.
The third section examines the structure of the supply chain, i.e., the
attributes. Section four investigates the challenges and barriers faced by
fisheries and seafood stakeholders. The fifth section explains emerging
solutions and strategies on the Indian supply chain. In the final section, the
paper recommends improvements to the fisheries supply chain to make it
more sustainable. Recommendations include ensuring hygienic ice and
water facilities for fish preservation and cleaning; basic hygiene training to
fishermen; promotion of fishermen cooperatives and an integrated
approach to food safety. This paper does not venture into the domestic
government initiatives to promote sustainability.

CHAPTER 01
AN INTRODUCTION TO SEAFOOD SUPPLY
CHAINS
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Though we call it a supply “chain,” there are few products in today’s

global economy that move along a simple, linear track, from production to
consumption. From clothing to cars to cod, modern supply chains
resemble increasingly complex networks of people and companies
worldwide that produce, transform, aggregate, separate, package,
transport, store, ship, trade, sell, and serve goods. Global supply chains
have become sufficiently complicated, such that there are advanced
degrees in supply chain management. And few supply chains are more
complex, convoluted, and cryptic than those involving seafood. This
primer provides an overview of seafood supply chains with a focus on
those that intersect with artisanal fisheries in emerging economies. On a
global scale, the seafood industry handles approximately 158 million
metric tons of product (over 91 million tons wild caught) every year.1
Tens of millions of people worldwide who fish for a living collectively
harvest thousands of different species; they fish in every ocean on the
planet, and range from independent artisanal fishers in emerging
economies to months-at-sea workers on factory trawlers. In addition to that
diversity, certain product characteristics, as well as practices of supply
chain actors, make seafood a wholly unique industry. First, fish are the
world’s last major source of wild protein. Nearly every other protein is
farmed. Even within seafood, 50 percent of the global market is farm-
raised. Because of ever-changing environmental and biological conditions,
wild seafood supply chains face uncertainty and risk that other farm-
raised-food supply chains are able to avoid or mitigate. Second, fresh
seafood is highly perishable. Without proper icing on boats

Figure 1: Fishery Market
and after landing, wild fish

has a very short shelf life. Globally, 20 percent of seafood spoils before it
reaches the consumer. Thus, at any given point in the supply chain the
player holding the fresh inventory is in a particularly vulnerable position,
racing against the clock to sell product before it expires. Knowing sellers
are in that predicament can put a potential buyer in a position of power.
This dynamic begins with fishers, who are often forced to accept whatever
price is offered by their buyers—even if it’s a low bid—because refusing
to sell and holding out for a higher price could result in losing the sale
altogether. Further along the supply chain, this imbalance can result in
ultra-squeezed margins, and can sometimes drive suppliers to resort to
extreme measures—such as mislabeling product or purchasing illegal
product—in order to stay solvent. While fresh and live fish remain the
dominant forms (46 percent) of seafood destined for the global edible
seafood market, even seafood supply chains that handle processed
products—frozen, canned, dried—must first ensure fresh product makes it
from water to the processing facility before it spoils. Frozen product is the
most common form of processed seafood on a global scale, accounting for
just over half of all processed fish for human consumption, and is driven
by demand in developed countries. Recent years have seen an increase in
the consumption of frozen fish in emerging economies, but that growth
rate has been hindered by a combination of traditional preferences for
other forms of preserved seafood (e.g., cured, smoked, dried) and
insufficient infrastructure. Lack of electricity, potable water, roads, ice

plants, and refrigerated transport threaten larger-scale production and
distribution of fresh or iced product. To build a robust cold chain capable
of preserving and protecting seafood product requires significant
investment where adequate facilities and infrastructure are not already in
place. As noted, this lack of storage can contribute to skewed power
dynamics, especially disenfranchising the fisher. Yet, new cold-chain
capabilities are not. Cold chains that help expand market access may also
have the negative impact of putting too much pressure on ecosystems, as
fishers can find buyers for more and more catch at ever-distant markets.
Third—and related to the point above—increasingly, the decision-making
regarding use of fisheries takes place at distances far removed from the
environment itself. This is especially the case in emerging economies that
sell access rights to foreign countries and in regions where foreign firms
buy up local processing and distribution outlets—an increasing trend as
seafood companies consolidate and vertically integrate worldwide. Both of
these conditions increase the disconnect between those making decisions
about extraction from the fishery and the health of the fishery itself.
Fourth, unlike other complex supply chains (such as automobile
manufacturing, in which lot-numbers can be permanently etched onto the
parts themselves), individual seafood products—or even individual lots—
can be difficult to track from the point of harvest through processing,
distribution, and on to the end market. In most fisheries, there are
transshipments at sea or aggregations on land, which comingle multiple
species caught by multiple fishers across multiple days or weeks, and from
multiple locations. Aggregation and comingling can occur further up the
chain as well. With the exception of large, high-value species, it can be
impractical and cost-prohibitive to tag individual fish at the point of
harvest. Thus, tracking the origins of seafood products and ensuring that
information about the journey of the fish is maintained through each step
in the chain requires seafood companies to have sophisticated systems for
traceability. Currently, this is sorely lacking on an industry-wide scale.
The combination of these factors—a wild resource, highly perishable
products, paper-thin margins, and lack of end-to-end traceability—creates
conditions whereby fraud, mislabeling, and sourcing illegal, unreported,
and unregulated (IUU) product can occur rather regularly, and often with

impunity. In some cases, those unlawful practices will be strategies for
unscrupulous mid-chain companies to increase profits or to price their
competitors out of the market. As recent exposés have highlighted, lack of
supply chain transparency also enables egregious human rights violations
(including human trafficking and slavery) within the seafood supply chains
of some of the world’s leading retailers, including Costco, Walmart, and
Tesco.
1.2 KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF WILD SEAFOOD SUPPLY

CHAINS

CHAPTER 02
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 OVERVIEW
Seafood products are some of the most traded food items in the world with
USD 143bn in value terms in 2016. At the same time, the ecological
footprint of fisheries and aquaculture can be considered as significant.
Almost one third of global fish stocks are overexploited and aquaculture
practices have shown to heavily stress the ecological equilibria.
Aquaculture and fisheries need to be managed sustainably, also beyond the
ecological factors, and in doing so, operational efficiencies can be
improved. The key objective in this report is to highlight key stakeholders’
operational challenges in global aquaculture and fisheries from a
sustainable supply chain’s perspective and to explore how technology, in
particular Block chain technology, may offer remedies to some of these
issues in a cost effective way. By doing so we start to see new ways of
generating new value creation and turning the industry towards a more
sustainable supply chain management.
Estimates in the early 1970s predicted the potential for traditionally
exploited marine species was about 100 million tonnes per year. Despite
development of non-traditional species, marine fishery production by 1994
reached only 90 million tonnes with capture fisheries accounting for 84
million tonnes. In 1994, the world's 200 major fishery resources accounted
for 77 percent of marine fish production. About 35 percent of these
resources are showing declining yields, about 25 percent are leveled at
high exploitation rates, 40 percent are still developing and none remain at
an undeveloped level. Thus, about 60 percent of the world's major fisheries
resources are mature or declining, and there is a need to establish more
effective management controls, reduce overall fishing effort and rebuild
overfished stocks. In a few remaining areas of the world, it is possible to
increase effort and landings. Estimates indicate that an increase of 10
million tonnes to a world total production of 93 million tonnes is possible
only through management improvements and further fishery development
of the capture sector. Another prediction indicates an additional 20 million
tonnes is possible, but only if degraded resources are rehabilitated, under-

developed resources are exploited further, overfishing is avoided in these
as well as in those resources currently fully exploited, and discarding and
waste are reduced. This creates important implications regarding the
world's supply of food, since about 70 percent of the world catch of fish
and fishery products is consumed as food.
On a worldwide basis, the total food supply of fish and fishery products
was 74 million metric tonnes (live weight of fish) in 1993. This is the
largest amount recorded, and represents an amount almost 2.5 times
greater than in the early 1960s. Food fish and fishery product supply on a
per capita basis was 13.4 kilograms (live weight of fish) in 1993. The
1991-1993 average was 13.0 kilograms, compared to the 1961-1963
average of 9.2 kilograms. Increases since the early 1960s have been steady
and gradual, with the principal growth in demand for fish as food coming
through population increases. For low-income food-deficit countries, per
capita supply was 9.6 kilograms in 1993. The 1991-93 average of 9.0
kilograms per capita was slightly double the 1961-1963 average of 4.3
kilograms per capita. On a relative basis, fish and fishery products has
become a more important food product for low-income food-deficit
countries. Fish represent 20.6 percent of all animal proteins and 4.7
percent of all proteins consumed per capita in low-income food-deficit
countries. Fish and fishery products represent 15.6 percent of animal
protein supply and about 5.6 percent of total protein supply on a
worldwide basis. This percentage has been stable over the last 33 years,
ranging from a low of 13.8 percent to a high of 16.0 percent (FAO 1996).
International trade in fish and fishery products has grown substantially
over the last three decades. The value of fish entering the world export
market has increased over twenty times from the 1968 value of US$2.2
billion to the 1993-1995 average annual value of US$46.95 billion (Table
1). Adjusting for inflation to measure the increase in real value terms, the
1993-1995 value is still five times greater that the 1968 value3. Today,
more than 30 percent of the fish caught for direct human consumption
enters international trade. Developing countries account for almost 50
percent of global fish exports (Karnicki 1997). The share of exports from
developing countries reached an all-time high of 51 percent with their net

receipts from foreign exchange increasing from US$10.4 billion in 1990 to
US$18.0 billion in 1995 (Lem and Shehadeh 1997). Sixteen different
countries averaged exports over US$1.0 billion annually from 1991 to
1993. These 16 countries accounted for 66 percent of world exports with
50 countries exporting 96 percent of the world total. Thailand was the
leading exporter at US$4.0 billion. The others were as follows (all US$):
United States, $3.3 billion; Norway, $2.7 billion; Denmark $2.3 billion;
China Taiwan, $2.3 billion; China Mainland, $2.2 billion; Indonesia, $1.6
billion; Russian Federation, $1.6 billion; Chile, $1.4 billion; Korea
Republic, $1.4 billion; Netherlands, $1.4 billion; Iceland, $1.2 billion;
India, $1.2 billion; United Kingdom, $1.1 billion and Spain, $1.0 billion.
Figure 2: Imports and exports of fishery commodities (a)

worldwide, by area of the world, and by selected trading
regions, three-year average, 1993-1995

CHAPTER 03
SEAFOOD SUPPLY CHAIN IN INDIA
3.1 OVERVIEW
Seafood export in India is over 50 years old. Indian seafood Industry has
come a long way; shipping seafood products to more than 100 countries.
Today Indian factories have grown to have world class facilities, with
better quality control; meeting the stringent international norms. On the
other hand, International Seafood trade has been changing over the years;
last decade had seen significant changes in the ‘supply’, ‘demand’ and
‘International tradenorms’; due to the compulsions from the importing
countries. International seafood industry is caught between; increased
demand for seafood due to ‘diet diversification’, and ‘over supply’ of fish
production. This increase in supply and demand has created various
environmental issues, like decline in world catch and over exploitation;
creating long term threat to the world. Since 1990s, three issues dominated
Indian export scene: decline in overall catches particularly shrimp;
fluctuations in international markets depressing prices and profitability and
overcapitalization of the production and marketing activities increasing
risk. The global seafood market is a complex system of trade and
sustainability issue. Today there is need for the global seafood industry to
balance ‘fisheries resources’, ‘global processing capabilities’ and the
‘increased global consumption’ in a more sustainable way. Indian seafood
processing units being a part of the global supply chain need to be a
responsible global supplier in providing sustainable seafood while
competing with other supplying countries in the global trade competition.
India has vast potential for fisheries in view of our long coastline spanning
about 8,118 kms in addition to inland water resources. India is the second
largest producer of fish and also second largest producer of fresh water
fish in the world. The sector plays an important role in the overall socio-
economic development of India. The sector has gained importance as it
contributes significantly to the national food security, livelihood
generation, agriculture diversification and enhanced foreign exchange

earnings. As a result, starting from a purely traditional activity in the early
fifties, fisheries and aquaculture have now transformed into a significant
commercial enterprise. As per the estimates of CSO, the Gross Value
Added from fisheries sector at current prices during 2013-14 was INR
96,824 crore which is about 5.2% of the Gross Value Added from
Agriculture, forestry and fishing sectors at current prices. India contributes
5.7% of the total global fish production. Fish production has increased
from 42 lakh tonnes (25 lakh tonnes for marine and 17 lakh tonnes for
inland fisheries) in 1991-92 to 96 lakh tonnes (35 lakh tonnes for marine
and 61 lakh tonnes for inland fisheries) in 2013-14 (Provisional). India
exported around 10.5 lakh tonnes of fish and fish products worth value
around INR 33 thousand crore in 2014-15. As per the Indian Livestock
Census, 2003, 14.5 million people were engaged in various fisheries
related activities. About 75% of the fishers are engaged in inland fisheries
activities and about 25% in marine fisheries activities.
Figure 3: Fish Production in India (thousand tons)

Figure 4: Trends in Export of Seafood, 1951–2001
(compounded growth rates in per cent)
Figure 5: Contribution of Seafood to India’s Exports

3.2 CATEGORIZATION OF RESOURCES
The fisheries sector is broadly divided into two categories i.e. Inland
fisheries and Marine fisheries.
There is another way of categorizing the fish cultivation i.e. Capture and
Culture fisheries. Capture fisheries - The cultivation is practiced without
storing the seed stocks. There is a gradual decrease in the yield because of
the uncontrolled catching of juveniles and brooders. Culture fisheries - The
cultivation of selected fishes in the confined areas with care to fetch higher
yields. The seeds are stocked, nursed and reared in the confined areas and
feed with proper supplements.

Figure 6: Indian fishery resource (2013-14)
3.3 PRODUCTION TRENDS

India is the second largest producer of fish in the world and also holds
second position both in aquaculture and inland capture fisheries. The total
provisional fish production for the year 2013-14 was estimated around 96
lakh tonnes growing at a CAGR of around 4 % for the last five years and
the annual growth rate was around 6 %. The marine fishery has been
growing at a CAGR of 2%, while the inland fishery has been growing at a
CAGR of around ~ 5% for the last five years.
Figure 7: Share of
Marine and Inland fish
production in 1990-91
and 2013-14

Figure 8: Top 10 states in fish production (lakh MT) in India
(2013-14)
3.3.1 FRESHWATER AQUACULTURE

The freshwater culture resources in the country comprise 2.43 mn ha of
ponds and tanks. The other resources where fish farming can be
undertaken include the flood plain lakes and other natural lakes, reservoirs,
irrigation canals and paddy fields. India is basically a carp country with
more than 80% of the production being contributed by carps alone. The
other significant contributor in recent years is Pangasius species. India is
now the third largest producer of Pangasius in the world after Vietnam and
Thailand.

Figure 9: Top 10 states in freshwater aquaculture (lakh MT)
in India (2013-14)
3.3.2 BRACKISH WATER AQUACULTURE

It is practiced in three different ways as described below:
• Fish production after the harvest of rice in the low land areas. It is
generally practiced in central Kerala, along the northern coastal waters of
Karnataka, Goa and some areas in West Bengal.
• Fish production in pondsthroughout the year in larger and deepen fields,
it is practiced in Kerala andWest Bengal.
• Rice and fish are raised together and is practiced majorly in West Bengal
and Goa.
The potential area under brackish water is estimated at 1.19 million
hectare. Around 14.8% of the potential area i.e. 0.17 million hectare has
been developed for the brackish water aquaculture. Andhra Pradesh has
utilized the maximum of the available potential area under brackish water
aquaculture i.e. around 57%. The production for the year 2012-13 was
around 2.71 lakh MT. The major contributor was Andhra Pradesh with a
production of around 1.6 lakh MT followed by West Bengal with a

production of around 0.53 lakh MT. Shrimp production comprises 20-
25% of the total brackish water aquaculture.
The brackish water sector encompasses the cultivation of giant tiger prawn
(Penaeus monodon) and exotic white leg shrimp (Penaeus vannamei).
From a production of 90,000 MT in the year 2010, it rose to 2, 70,819 MT
in 2013-14. It had also increased the export earnings by leaps and bounds.
3.3.3 MARINE FISH PRODUCTION
The marine fish production for the year 2013-14 (P) was 34.43 lakh MT.
Maharashtra is the largest producer with a share of around 20% followed
by Chennai with a production of around 5 lakh MT and Karnataka with a
production of around 4.67 lakh MT. The combined share of all the three
states is around 49% of the total production. Marine fish production is
practiced along the Indian Ocean east and west coast of India. The east
coast of India includes Andhra Pradesh, Odisha, Chennai, West Bengal,
Andaman & Nicobar and Pondicherry and the west coast includes Gujarat,
Karnataka, Kerala, Maharashtra, Lakshadweep, and Daman & Diu. As per
the production statistics of 2012, the contribution of the west coast had the
higher share in the marine production (65%) than the east coast (35%).
Figure 10: State wise marine fish production (lakh MT) in

India (2013-14 P)

CHAPTER 04
STRUCTURE OF SEAFOOD SUPPLY CHAIN
4.1 BASIC SUPPLY CHAIN
Every wild seafood supply chain begins with a producer (the fisher) and
terminates with an end buyer, who sells to a consumer. End buyers include
retail outlets (from locally owned fish markets to national supermarket
chains), restaurants, and foodservice establishments, such as hotels,
hospitals, and schools.In artisanal fisheries, it is not uncommon for fishers
to bypass the supply chain completely and sell their catch directly to
consumers on the beach or door-to-door within the community. However,
for seafood sold into more formal markets, supply chains can consist of
any number or combination of mid-chain players (e.g., aggregators,
primary processors, traders, wholesalers, dealers, secondary processors,
distributors, transporters), who transform, package, and move product
from the point of production to the final sale. Generally speaking, the more
mid-chain players present, the greater the complexity of the supply chain,
the greater the risk of losing data and story, and the greater the possibility
of fraud. However, shorter supply chains don’t necessarily equate with
more trustworthy data. For instance, in a very short supply chain where
one processor aggregates catch from dozens of fishers and then sells to
two retailers, the process of tracing each product back to the source is
impossible without a system for segregating and labeling product from
every producer.
Fishery is a state subject under the constitution of India but very few states
have dedicated bodies for the development and marketing of fish produced
in the state. Domestic market has the bulk share in context to the
marketing of the fish produced in the country i.e. 85% of the produce
which is highly unorganized and scattered. About, 70% of the fish
harvested is marketed fresh and rest is consumed in the form of smoked,
dried, processed fish meal and others. However, the harvested fish is not
evenly distributed to interior areas due to lack of transportation and non-
availability of proper storage facilities. Therefore, there is a need for

balanced system of distribution to make fish available in the interior areas
at reasonable rates. The annual per capita consumption of fish in India is
2.85 Kg. The existing per capita availability of fish is 6.5 kg and is
expected to reach 9.0 kg by 2030. The domestic fish marketing is
primarily dominated by the private players with the involvement of
different stakeholders across the hierarchy thereby reducing the
fishermen’s profit margin. Bulkiness, perishable nature, poor handling,
heterogeneity, high transportation and storage costs are the major
constraints faced by this sector
Figure 11: Key Players in Domestic Fish Marketing in India
1. FISHERMAN:-
An average fishing trip is approximately four to five days and
involves spending approximately Rs. 60,000–70,000. The risk of
inadequate catch is completely borne by the fisherman. The inputs
required on the boat include diesel (approximately 2,000–2,500

litres), ice (8–10 tons), helpers (10–12 on average), assistant
fishermen aboard the boat and food. The fisherman sells his catch as
per different types of fish to the commission agent. The fish at this
stage are not graded because the fisherman lacks adequate
knowledge of fish handling. The ice on which fish is stocked is made
from unclean water and handled in unsanitary conditions. Salt used
in ice is unprocessed, rendering it inappropriate for consumption. Ice
handlers use dirty feet and hands to handle ice and transfer it to the
storage facilities of the boat. However, socio-economic conditions in
fishing villages are better than in farming villages.6 The logical
argument is that the value of a fisherman’s catch is comparatively
higher than a farmer’s yield. Further, the seafood supply chain in the
domestic market is quite short and reasonably transparent, resulting
in better margins for each actor, including the fishermen. Also,
fishing is not a seasonal exercise like farming.
Figure 12: Expenditure Breakdown of an Average Fisherman.
2. COMMISSION AGENT:-
The commission agent is the link between the fisherman and the
supplier. The commission agent is particularly useful because he
deals with less literate, local-language speaking fishermen as well as
organized and professional suppliers. The commission agent
procures goods from the fisherman and grades each type of fish as
clean or defective, based on the condition of the fish (i.e., wear and
tear, size, broken parts, etc.).

3. SUPPLIER:-
The supplier is the link between the commission agent and the
exporter. The supplier has trucks to transport products to his facility
where they are cleaned and graded in three to four grades based on
size, quality and defects. Suppliers often deal with single types of
fish, unlike commission agents who deal with the complete catch of
the fishermen. Suppliers have small depots alongside docks or
harbours where products are sorted and cleaned. Severe infringement
of labour and human rights are observed at the supplier’s facilities,
especially child labour and extremely poor working facilities.
Sanitation is very poor; drains are open and effluent is discharged
without treatment. Solid wastes such as small fins and insoluble
effluents are discharged into open drains. Bigger solid waste such as
spoiled fish and broken organs are dumped in open garbage cans in
the vicinity, creating a foul smell in the surroundings. This situation
exists even though garbage is cleaned twice-a-day by municipal
authorities. Working conditions are very poor. Small children,
women and some men clean fish in groups of four while squatted on
the floor. The ground is wet, cold, without cushions and there is little
space between workers. There is no provision of organized labour. A
contractor is appointed for daily labour requirements and nearly all
workers get daily wages without any social security. Fishermen,
suppliers and preprocessors do not receive adequate attention from
MPEDA,7 compared to the attention received by exporters. Hence
their performance goes unchecked.
4. EXPORTER:-
The exporter is the most sophisticated end of the supply chain.
Issues such as the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point
(HACCP) first emerge at the exporters end. The rest of the chain is
completely unaware of export-import regulations and safety issues.
The exporter is the price setter—the prices move downwards from
the exporter to the supplier, to the agent and then to the fisherman on
a daily basis. The level of transparency is very low between each of
these groups. Even suppliers are unaware of the selling price of

exporters. Nevertheless, exporters receive prices from their buyers in
importing countries. Due to lower margins and a drop in global
prices in 2004, small Indian exporters are facing immense
competition from huge global counterparts, often over 100 times
their size. Iceland with over 150 small units faced a similar situation
nearly two decades ago against the backdrop of globalization and
survived the crisis through consolidation. Ten small units merged to
become one unit, large enough in size and capacity to match the big
ones in the U.S. and EU. Learning from the Iceland approach, eight
of the 68 seafood-processing units in Kerala have decided to merge
into a single, large public-limited company. The minimum cost of a
EU certified plant is Rs. 80 million. The net worth of companies
who are certified to export to the EU ranges between Rs. 800 and Rs.
3,000 million. MPEDA is very active in ensuring that exporter
facilities are able to comply with international standards. Employees
in export units are well trained and wear gloves and face masks. The
hygiene facilities are very good. Staff have access to clean toilets,
wear clean uniforms and have a comfortable work environment.
Most importers and buyer representatives visit export facilities on a
regular basis, especially when the importer is planning a long-term
purchasing contract. Exporters are particularly concerned about the
handling methods at the bottom of the chain, i.e., at the fishermen’s
level. Hygiene and food safety infrastructure at the docks is
inadequate. Wastage and the cost of compliance will be substantially
reduced with adequate training of fishermen and a minimum
infrastructure at the beginning of the chain.
5. IMPORTER:-
This research involved a short field survey in Europe to determine if
importers are concerned about fishery sustainability issues. Similar
to several other sectors, there is significant divergence in the
performance of big and small importers. Particularly interesting is
that several importers are also concerned about importing
regulations in their own countries, allegedly driven by consumer
organizations. This is causing uncertainty in business transactions.
Small importers have restricted their requirements to mandatory
import regulations which are very high, while big importers inquire
about traceability and sustainability. Due to the low possibility of
implementation and scarcity of resources, no importer has imposed
any labelling requirement on exporters beyond mandatory
obligations. Several large international groups such as the British
Seafood have their own sourcing codes which cover ethical trading
and sustainability, and conduct independent verifications and annual
supplier audits. These codes are based on international norms such
as the Ethical Sourcing Initiative. There is immense pressure on
retailers in Europe to keep fish prices low, even at the cost of
excessive resource use since fish is becoming a staple food in the
diet of Europeans. Its popularity is increasing because of better
health benefits in comparison to meat and chicken. In research
conducted by Consumers International in Europe, 45 different claims
were found on 12 products, ranging from “friend of the sea,” “better
for the environment,” “sourced from population conserving fishery,”
“committed to conservation fishing methods” to “dolphin safe”
(Consumers International 2004). This has confused the consumer
and has made him/her less label conscious. The price premium for
sustainably managed Indian seafood is untested, since India does not
have a single seafood ecolabel. Internationally, the MSC label has
certified a handful of fisheries amounting to less than 0.5 per cent of
global fish trade. Although MSC certified fish are able to gain
certain price premiums, the market for such fish is too small for
making any observation. Most importers think the importance of
sustainability will grow exponentially in the future, especially due to
the rate that fish stocks are depleting. Although aquaculture is
currently filling the gap, expected growth rates in seafood demand
may outpace supply. Further, intensive aquaculture has far-reaching
impacts, not only on future supply, but also on the environment
(mangrove destruction, salinization, groundwater pollution, etc.).

Figure 13: Role of Supply Chain Actors.
4.1.1 SUPPLY CHAIN FOR DOMESTIC MARKET

Fish for consumption in domestic market is not processed and is stored in
ice flakes for transportation. The domestic industry is not organized and
vendors procure unprocessed fish from commission agents after primary
sorting and grading to sell to consumers in local markets. For domestic
consumption, fish reaches the consumer within 1-2 days. Various
stakeholders do not store the fish due to the high perish ability and sells it
to the next level as soon as possible.
Figure 14: Value Chain for Fisheries(Domestic)

4.1.2 SUPPLY CHAIN FOR EXPORTS
Figure 15: Value Chain for Fisheries(Exports)
Figure 16: Distribution of Income in the Supply Chain (in per cent)
4.2 PROCESSING AND STORAGE
Figure 17: Processing and Storage Infrastructure in India

Wholesale markets- The fish handling capacity in the Indian wholesale
markets ranges from 1 MT to 100 MT. The infrastructure is dismal in
majority of the Indian wholesale markets with limited cold chain facility,
access to quality drinking water, parking facilities. Most of the wholesale
markets are obsolete with minimal supervision and low keeping quality.
The left over fishes are stored in unhygienic plastic containers.
Retail markets- They are the miniature version of the wholesale markets
with majority of them along the roadside. The retail markets lack the cold
storage facility, shelters, and fish dressing platforms. They are highly
organized with limited keeping quality.
Retail outlets- They are owned both by the private and government
bodies. They are located strategically in towns and cities. They are
equipped with the modern facilities. They procure directly from the
fishermen or the cooperative societies and cater the need of the consumers
at a reasonable rate. The objective of retail outlets is to minimize the
involvement of middlemen so as to create win-win situation both for the
consumers and the farmers. Tamil Nadu Fisheries Development
Corporation (TNFDC) with name “Neidhal” and Matsyafed with the name
“Fresh fish point” are running successfully in the state of Tamil Nadu and
Kerala respectively
The cold chain components for export value chain are Flake Ice/Block Ice
(Farm to Factory Gate)>> Block Processing/Blast Freezing/IQF
(Processing and Freezing)>> Freezer Cold Storages (Storage) >>Cold
Chain Containers (Logistics and Export). A brief description of these
components is provided below:
A. Block Ice/Tube Ice/Flake Ice/Slurry Ice – Block Ice plants are the
most widely available source of ice for the fishing industry in the
country. These ice plants are densely established in the coastal
regions mainly for satiating the need of the fisheries sector. Tube Ice
is the new development in the fishing industry as many of the sea
food factories have already resorted to it for getting regular ice
production in the plants. Flake Ice machine is widely used in IQF sea
food plants and is useful where immediate chilling is required.

Slurry Ice machine can be fixed onboard fishing vessels ensuring
rapid cooling of fish till it reaches the shore.
B. IQF Processing - India till the year 1986 was exporting fish
products by using conventional type of freezing wherein the
products were generally packed in blocks of 2 kgs by block freezing.
The disadvantages of block freezing are that the product loses its
identity and the consumer is forced to buy the product in bulk. In
cases where reprocessing is involved the quality of end product is
affected. Hence these factors necessitated the introduction of
Individually Quick Frozen Products. Shrimp products are the major
item among the marine products exported from India. Since the
preference in importing countries is towards IQF products and also
there is value addition if the products are IQF. The major varieties of
IQF products which are exported include shrimp, cuttle fish, lobsters
and fishes.
C. Cold Storages - Once fish is frozen, it must be stored at a constant
temperature of −23 degree celsius or below in order to maintain a
long shelf life and ensure quality. A large portion of fresh fish is
water. Because the water in fish contains many dissolved substances,
it does not uniformly freeze at the freezing point of pure water.
Instead, the free water in fish freezes over a wide range of
temperature, beginning at approximately −2 degree celsius. The
amount of remaining free water decreases until the product reaches a
temperature of approximately −40 degree celsius. Fish held below
that temperature and packaged so as not to allow water loss through
sublimation can be stored for an indefinite period. Unfortunately,
there are relatively few commercial freezers capable of storing fish
at –40 degree celsius because of the tremendous variation in energy
costs. Fish are therefore normally stored at −18 to −29 degree celsius
resulting in a variable shelf life ranging from a few weeks to almost
one year. A production cold store is usually a part of the fish
processing plant for storing frozen finished products. Bulk cold
stores normally give the same service as production cold stores, but
are often located at some distance from the actual processing
industries and are normally much larger than the production stores

which cater to the needs of other processing plants also for storing
frozen sea foods on custom hiring basis. Capacity of cold stores
normally ranges between 1,000 MT and 10,000 MT. However, the
size of the cold store depends on a number of factors like amount of
traffic, average storage period, number of articles, as well as the
number of clients.
Figure 18: Region wise processing facility capacities.

Figure 19: Region wise storage capacities in MT
4.3 DISTRIBUTION AND MARKETING

Seafood reaches its customers through organized retail partnerships as well
as directly through Home Delivery. Home Delivery is executed from
various satellite units with order fulfillment by delivery bike across
Mumbai. The Distribution Centre is designed to perform the following
functions:
 Receive Seafood in bulk from landing centers, shipped by the

most cost effective means.
 Maintain stock at 1-4 degrees Celsius with the help of ice and
stored in assorted insulated boxes under HACCP compliant
conditions.
 Serve as a check point for inward movement of product (weight
validation, quality testing and entry into the Inventory
Management System).

 Home Delivery - the product is then wrapped in food-grade
plastic packing and placed in a leak-proof, insulated thermocole
box into which the appropriate quantity of ice is added to keep
the temperature of the fish at 1-4 degrees Celsius.
 Inter – state fish distribution: Fish is packed in thermocole box
with adequate layers of ice, which is then transferred via Indian
Railways
 Inter-city fish distribution: Fish is packed in plastic trays with
multiple layers of ice which helps to maintain product
temperature throughout.
Figure 20: Marketing Channels

4.4 SUPPLY CHAIN ATTRIBUTES
The following section identifies common supply chain attributes which
relate to the ways product and product-level information flow, how mid-
chain players function within certain seafood supply chains, and the
motivations that drive certain practices. Identifying which attributes may
be present in a supply chain can help hone strategies for how to effectively
promote and incentivize more responsible fishing practices, better data
capture and tracking, and better storytelling around product origin
A. Type of Product (commodity Vs Differentiated)
The degree to which a product is differentiated within a supply chain is
perhaps the most informative attribute for determining the potential to
influence that chain with respect to sustainability. At one end of the
spectrum are commodities, which lack differentiation. These are high-
volume products aggregated from many sources, and for which all the
individual units—be they whole fish, filets, or value-added products—are
considered identical, regardless of how, where, when, or by whom they
were produced or harvested. Purchasing decisions are driven first by price,
and then by decisions regarding quality, with little consideration about
sustainability (though see noted exceptions below). Supply chains that
handle commodity products typically move processed product that can be
frozen and thawed and refrozen multiple times as it travels through
multiple players operating in multiple countries. Increasingly, one step
within these supplies chains involves a routing through China, where
processing (e.g., filleting, breading) often occurs before product is then re-
exported. Commodity chains are not structured to track information about
product origin, nor do they recognize source fisheries that adopt
sustainable management regimes or practices. Instead, sustainable product
sold into a commodity chain is comingled with unsustainable product.
Many high-volume fisheries feed into commodity supply chains, but some
of the most common include salmon, cod (and other types of whitefish),
tuna, anchovies, and crab. With the growth of sustainable-seafood
certification programs, however, some commodity-type products now have
an element of differentiation. Such is the case with McDonald’s MSC-

certified whitefish products. High volume and interchangeable, these
supply chains segregate the product so that it can be traced back to specific
certified fisheries. At the other end of the product spectrum are
differentiated products, which are distinguishable from one another based
on specific information, including harvest location, fishing method, fisher
or fishing community, certification status, and brand. In general,
purchasing decisions by supply chain actors are driven either by quality
first and then price, or at least equally by these two features, as opposed to
the clearly price-driven decision-making that occurs with commodity
products. Across supply chains, there are several degrees of
differentiation. These can The Structure of Seafood Supply Chains
Commodity chains are not structured to track information about product
origin, nor do they recognize source fisheries that adopt sustainable
management. Making Sense of Wild Seafood Supply Chains 11 be based
on
(1) GEOGRAPHY: aggregation of all product from multiple vessels in a
single fishery.
(2) PRODUCT QUALITIES: specifically graded products (size, quality,
sustainability) from vessels in a fishery with or without origin data;
(3) VESSEL: batches of product, such as from a single landing, net haul,
or trap set;
(4) INDIVIDUAL FISH: typically high-value species that may be
individually tagged with unique codes, and include tuna, lobster, salmon,
and snapper. The supply chains that handle differentiated products need
more sophisticated data management and traceability systems to track and
verify the information associated with the unit of differentiation.
Differentiated-product supply chains can serve local, regional, or export
markets. In general, the fewer the steps between harvest and when the
product is in its final form and labeled, the easier it is to keep the story
paired with the fish.
There are no set rules regarding whether a product qualifies as
differentiated or commodity. For example, a vessel may unload a single

catch that contains individual fish with different features. As opposed to
sending the entire lot into a commodity channel, a middleman or processor
may grade the product according to size, quality, or some other attribute
for which the market is willing to pay a premium. Thus, the catch itself is
coarsely differentiated, and then individual products may end up as
commodities or differentiated products, depending on the market’s
demand for distinguishing information. The process can become even
more complicated when product from one fishery travels through multiple
supply chains based on buyer demand. In a lobster fishery, for example,
MSC-certified product might wind up as a premium good in a specialized
grocery store, or can be sold as a commodity through a supply chain that
delivers product to a chain restaurant. In the latter case, what was once a
differentiated product becomes mixed into a commodity chain, where
distinguishing features are then lost.
B. Brand Presence
Brand Presence Some supply chains are driven by brands that dictate
product specifications and other protocols that producers, processors,
distributors, and end buyers must follow. This influential brand can affect
local, regional, national, or international supply chains. In most cases, the
influence is top-down, coming from an end buyer (e.g., Whole Foods), a
value-added processor (e.g., Wild Planet), a broker (e.g., Clean Fish), or a
certification standards setter (e.g., the MSC). In other instances a brand
created by or in collaboration with fishers will create bottom-up influence
over the supply chain, as is seen with some traceability companies (e.g.,
This Fish), NGOs (e.g., Gulf Wild), or even fishing cooperatives (e.g.,
Alaska Gold). The specifications required by the brand may be based on
location, quality, sustainability criteria, or other attributes that distinguish
the brand in the marketplace. As such, it is of utmost importance to
establish systems that ensure the branded product is differentiated from
unbranded product. . Some mid-chain players may be involved with
processing and distributing multiple types of branded and unbranded
products, and it is not uncommon for brands to look to such players to

serve multiple supply chain roles (e.g., processor/distributor). In some
cases, brands will purchase fish directly from producers and perform the
processing and packaging themselves in order to maintain close control
The Structure of Seafood Supply Chains It is possible to influence an
entire supply chain by working with a brand to incorporate sustainability
criteria. 12 Making Sense of Wild Seafood Supply Chains and further
protect brand integrity. Each player within the supply chain has a direct or
indirect relationship with the brand and in some cases the brand is the
exclusive market channel through which product from specific producers
flows. Depending on the mission of the brand and ability to access key
decision makers, it is possible to influence an entire supply chain by
working with a brand to incorporate sustainability criteria into their
product specifications.
C. Relationship Dynamics
Relationships within the seafood industry typically are long lasting and
built on trust, especially relationships between fishers and their buyers
(e.g., middlemen, first receivers). Within some artisanal fisheries, those
relationships tend to be both business and personal in nature. For example,
a middleman that buys from a fisher may also provide loans for fuel and
ice, and may even have financed the boat. Often, the middleman is a
member of the fisher’s family. While some fishers may feel comfortable
with this type of dependent relationship or may be fortunate to have a
charitable buyer, others can become trapped by this arrangement. Even
further up the supply chain, the power dynamics of the seller-buyer
relationship can skew quite easily, especially if the buyer begins to exploit
the seller’s vulnerable position (holding spoiling inventory) or limited
market access (see Attribute 5: Market access). However, to the extent that
trading-partner relationships are healthy and the product can be
differentiated to some degree, supply chains containing such close ties
might be among the most flexible and potentially open to implementing
changes that could benefit the long-term sustainability of a fishery—both
in terms of the resource and the people and businesses involved. In

situations where trading-partner relationships are weak or acrimonious, the
supply chain will be very difficult to influence directly.
D. Supply Chain Consolidation (Vertically Integrated Vs.

Dispersed)
Many seafood supply chains are vertically integrated. All supply chain
functions fall under single company ownership, with one actor controlling
most major steps in the supply chain, from fishing activities until the
product is sold to the end buyer, or even to the consumer. When necessary,
additional product may also be sourced from independent fishers. Such
vertical integration provides a company with guaranteed access to product
landed by its vessels, protects the company from ex-vessel price volatility,
and allows for close quality and inventory control. Large corporations tend
to exhibit this feature most, moving fresh and frozen products around the
globe, although consolidation can be found in fisheries serving smaller
local markets as well. For sustainably minded companies, vertical
integration greatly expedites the implementation of better management and
fishing practices—all that is needed is a top-down directive. For
companies motivated solely by profit or that do not recognize the
importance of sustainable management, vertical integration can create a
barrier to change. The Structure of Seafood Supply Chains Supply chains
containing such close ties might be among the most flexible and
potentially open to implementing changes that could benefit the long-term
sustainability of a fishery. Making Sense of Wild Seafood Supply Chains
13 On the other end of the spectrum are supply chains in which every
function is performed by an independent entity, each working to make a
profit. Short supply chains (two to three players) or those focused on
differentiated or local product can work quite efficiently and may be
effectively motivated around a common and mutually beneficial goal
related to sustainability. However, for chains focused on commodity
products or for those that are significantly longer (5-10 nodes, for
example), that level of collaboration may prove more challenging. In
general, as a supply chain lengthens, the margins shrink and players

become incentivized to do whatever is necessary to cut costs (including, at
times, committing fraud), as each player along the chain is always looking
to pay the lowest price possible.
E. Market Access (Bottleneck Vs. Open Access)
Many remote, artisanal fisheries involve a large number of fishers selling
to a few middlemen who hold the supply-chain relationships. These
middlemen create a bottleneck for fishers, restricting direct access to the
market. Depending on the type of product and location of the fishery, there
may be a series of middleman-aggregators that comingle product for a
single processor or distributor serving a domestic or international market;
or there may be a single middleman-processor-exporter that buys from all
local fishers and is the gateway for foreign companies to gain access to
artisanal product. (Often the processors hold the export licenses.) The
existence of such bottlenecks limits the power fishers have to negotiate
price. The ability to influence fisher behavior with respect to sustainable
management hinges on being able to leverage the power held by the
middleman, which requires convincing him or her that sustainable
practices are aligned with business needs. In the case of fishery
improvement projects (FIPs), that is often done in partnership with a major
domestic or foreign buyer that can promise better market share or premium
prices in return for better management or fishing practices. Some fishers
have more choice when it comes to where and to whom they sell their fish.
They may be nearer to the end market, with options of bypassing the
middleman and selling direct. Or they may have a highly demanded
product, with multiple potential buyers bidding up the price. When it
comes to influencing fishing practices toward sustainability, these fishers
may be easily motivated, especially with the possibility of a new market
channel.

CHAPTER 05
SUPPLY CHAIN CHALLENGES
5.1 THE CHALLENGES
 Lack of Vessel-level Data Capture
What it is: Lack of paper or electronic records of where, when, how, by
whom, and what was caught by each vessel for each trip. Ideally, this
information would be recorded at the most granular level of fishing
activity, such as by a series of traps in one location or individual net hauls.
For small-scale fishers, and depending on the method of harvest, data
capture may make the most sense at the end of a fishing set, or at the
landing site.
Where it occurs: In many fisheries around the world, fishers are not
required to report their catch to the government or to any supply chain
entity. When they are required to do so, data are spotty, are incomplete,
and can easily be lost, as records are kept on paper. Fish are also
commonly mislabeled, or labeled under a generic name (e.g., snapper or
reef fish). Records of transactions with first receivers, if they exist, often
do not include relevant catch data, but rather provide only a logbook of
total weight, price, and a generic name, which in the tropics is often
incorrect or is a common name applicable to many species. Even when
information is recorded by the first receiver, it is usually lost at some point
further up the supply chain. The default for data sharing is that suppliers
will pass along only the information required or requested by their
customers, or by government rules and regulations. Without clients
demanding additional data on catch origin, mid-chain players will not
spend their resources to capture or share those details—even when they
have them. In the event where they have the data, confidentiality of fishing
spots is also at play, although this tends to be more the case in developed
countries.
Why it matters: Vessel-level data is the most relevant information for
resource management and for determining the sustainability and legality of

a product. Fishery-dependent data is often the only available data for
determining stock health, especially in countries where government
resources are too strapped to run fishery-independent data collection. In
addition, all company branding and consumer-facing marketing initiatives
that claim to deliver sustainable seafood must have access to vessel-level
data (and verification of it) to ensure the business is, in fact, supporting
more responsible practices on the water.
 Product Transformation Prior to Data Recording
What it is: When a product or group of products is processed prior to the
first instance of data collection. This can include:
• Grading of product to selectively deliver certain species or sizes to a
processor. Recorded catch at this stage does not account for the original
catch composition;
• Removal of flesh from the shell before sizing or sex is determined;
• Skinning and fileting a fish before species identification has occurred.
Where it occurs: In some fisheries, early product transformation tends to
occur on deck aboard vessels as a way to consolidate catch and reduce
weight (when quotas are in place) or to hide illegal product (e.g.,
juveniles). Grading or shelling may also take place dockside upon receipt
by the first receiver before the product is moved to a more formal
processing facility where data are recorded more regularly
Why it matters: Transforming product, when driven by the purest of
intentions, is a logistics decision. For example, conch fishers do not want
to take up space in their small boats or in their coolers with conch shells,
so they remove the meat while still at sea and discard the shells overboard.
Without the shells, it is impossible to know the age of the conch—which is
determined by shell length and shell lip thickness. Regardless of motive,
early product transformation can thwart sustainability efforts related to the
harvest of particular species, juveniles, or certain sexes.

 Aggregation of Supply
What it is: The mixing of product from different fishing events into a
single volume. This makes it difficult, if not impossible, to accurately
determine catch origin, catch method, date of harvest, size composition, or
any other data related to the fishing activity.
Where it occurs: Aggregation tends to occur at the beginning of the
supply chain—on the deck of the vessel, or at the level of the first receiver.
With limited hold space, fishers often combine product from different
fishing events, even if sets are separated by long distances and occur over
several days. Likewise, most processing plants grade product according to
quality or size, regardless of when, where, or how it was caught. As this
sorting occurs, product from different batches is mixed and moved along
the processing line en masse.
Why it matters: Aggregation makes it impossible to differentiate
responsibly harvested product in the marketplace, as the critical
information regarding the catch is lost. Aggregation perpetuates “mystery
fish”—as opposed to promoting “storied fish”—as the norm.
 Relationship Dynamics
What it is: Complex, personal, and imbalanced relationships are common
in the seafood supply chain.
Where it occurs: Relationship dynamics occur throughout the supply
chain, but ones of particular interest are those between the producer and
first receiver (a middleman who often also serves as the processor or
wholesaler).
Why it matters: Determining an appropriate intervention strategy for
shifting supply chains depends on understanding the human side of the
supply chain equation. Knowing which actors hold power and the nature
of those relationships is critical for determining whether and how to
broach an idea around sustainable management with a community or
company. In many cases, the tight-knit and familial relationships between

fishers and middlemen mean that some strategies may be more appropriate
than others. For example, one popular suggestion for incentivizing fishers
to adopt more sustainable practices involves securing direct market access
to end buyers willing to give fishers a price premium for responsibly
harvested product. In some circumstances, this approach may mean
skipping over an exploitative supplier that had been undercutting fishers;
in other cases, it may mean leapfrogging a fisher’s close relative, trusted
friend, or community member—possibly even someone who finances
fishing activities or covers a family’s medical costs. Thus, understanding
the potential personal and interpersonal ramifications of a particular
intervention or engagement is of utmost importance, as leveraging supply
chain relationships can be the determining factor for success.
 Fishers Typically Are Not Businesspeople
What it is: Fishers are experts at fishing, but might not have the know-
how or experience necessary to engage more productively (and
sustainably) in the seafood industry.
Where it occurs: At the producer level of the supply chain.
Why it matters: Many fishers are frustrated by the fact that in order to
succeed as successful, sustainable fishers, their time is spent doing
everything but fishing. Often, strategies to help fishers get more value for
their products require skills in processing, marketing, price negotiations,
logistics (e.g., transport, product handling), management and
administration (e.g., inventory management, purchase orders, invoices),
and even community organizing (via co-ops, sectors, associations, or other
structures). A realistic strategy for sustainable management must provide
fishers with the necessary business-related support services so that they
can focus instead on changing their fishing practices (including new gear
types, if necessary). Fishers that are natural entrepreneurs and are
interested in doing more than just fishing should be offered appropriate
training.

 Cultural Preferences
What it is: These are the ingrained expectations, assumptions, and
perceptions that shape everything from which species are considered
“favored” to the way fishers view their roles in the community.
Where it occurs: Most frequently at the two ends of the supply chain:
producers and consumers.
Why it matters: Cultural norms can explain a lot about the root
motivations or causes for certain behaviors. They are also often the most
difficult to shift, especially if they are tied to deeply held values.
Understanding the beliefs and expectations that directly influence fisher
behavior is critical to crafting strategies that align— and perhaps even
leverage—those values, rather than fighting against them.
 Lack of Monitoring and Enforcement
What it is: A glaring hole in government responsiveness to actors in the
supply chain that are breaking the rules.
Why it matters: Some interventions require regulatory changes (such as
permits for exclusive access rights) that depend on proper enforcement for
effectiveness. A significant lack of enforcement—both on the water and
inside supply chain facilities—quickly erodes the confidence of players
making sacrifices to “do the right thing.” While it is impossible to root out
all “bad” behavior from a fishery even with the most sophisticated
technology and well-funded government agency, fishers and supply chain
players need at least some level of assurance that the government will
support their efforts to make changes to comply with more responsible
fisheries management.
 Lack of Database and Data Management Capacity
What it is: Many emerging markets lack the institutional resources to
support the collection, management, and analysis of fisheries data. Even if
it were collected, there is literally nowhere for this information to go.

Why it matters: Whether industry-based, collected from fishers, or via
independent methods, efforts to improve data capture will fail to improve
fisheries if there is no mechanism for storing, accessing, and analyzing.
Currently, many initiatives on how to improve information for data poor
regions focus on the capture of data while ignoring the need for back-end
structures to support this effort. Database management is a heavy lift,
requiring maintenance, storage capacity, and strategic development of
access rights and security. The latter especially requires careful planning
and dialogue with all stakeholders to ensure legality and effective use of
the database for both industry and fisheries benefits.
 Interrelatedness of Challenges
What it is: Although the challenges just outlined were presented as
distinct obstacles, they are actually interrelated. They create feedback
loops that serve to perpetuate the status quo, failing to reward fishers for
responsible practices and preventing the flow of information required for
storied fish to reach the market.
Why it matters: Attempting to remove just one barrier will likely not
result in significant change. The challenges must be addressed
simultaneously, through multipronged approaches and with buy-in and
participation from various supply chain actors and other stakeholders.
However, just as the challenges are caused by supply chain characteristics
and dynamics, the removal of the barriers may create an opening for
supply chains to act as drivers that incentivize sustainable management.
1. Data and information flow

 Lack of interoperability between trading partners’ systems, also
beyond direct trading partners, leading to integration difficulties of
received data, and systematic information loss in the supply chain
 Data quality issues on received data, miscommunication due to
glossary used, and lack of granularity of the data calls for
standardization
 Tampering of data is possible and leads to a lack of trust in the
received data

2. Reputational risk
 Negative news about the seafood industry will often hit all industry
players, not just the company in focus
 Brand reputation damage can be challenging, without the possibility
to defend oneself against the claims
 Proving best-in-class and providing documentation to the end-
consumer is difficult.
3. Transparency and consumer engagement

 Lack of transparency requirement setting and focus, due to each
party optimizing for internal data use and not to the benefit of the
entire supply chain
 Little accountability across complex supply chains
 Proving and documenting provenance to the end-consumer is
difficult and limited
 Lack of an efficient end-consumer information and marketing
channel
 A lack of understanding of what information the end-consumer
requires or wishes to have
4. Inadequate cold storage and transportation facilities:

Inadequate cold storage and transportation facilities at retail level
compound the problem of seafood wastage. A wholesaler of fish can
afford to have a cold storage wagon to supply fish at retail markets. The
retail suppliers are small traders; cycle/rickshaw or head-load vendors who
use ice for storage and cannot afford capital intensive storage facilities.
The quality of water used in ice preparation can also cause degradation of
quality of fish. Further, the inability to respond to changing safety and
quality standards is a major concern in developing countries especially in
India.
5. Unorganized Channels:
Presently, fish markets, both wholesale and retail in the country are in a
pathetic condition. Besides, a larger volume of fish is sold through
unorganized channels via street markets, often on footpaths. This
unhygienic environment and the fact that fish is seldom kept in ice, results

in fast deterioration of the quality of the fish. Mostly whole fish is sold in
the market and there is negligible processing/value addition. Further, while
marketing, transportation or storage of fish, the standard norms of hygiene
and sanitation are least considered, leading to a product that is
contaminated and unsafe from food safety point of view.
6. Spoilage during the monsoon season:

Various studies have indicated to the high levels of wastage in the Indian
fishery due to spoilage especially during the monsoon season, when up to
30 percent of the catch could be lost. Therefore, strengthening of post-
harvest infrastructure such as cold storage facilities, ice plants,
freezing/processing units, roads and transportation, modern and hygienic
wholesale and retail market outlets etc., as well as effective marketing
system in identified areas are the key requirements for the development of
this sector. This would ensure higher profit margins to the fish producers
accelerating the growth of the sector. This will also promote quality
assurance and better food safety standards for fish food for domestic
consumers and also for the export market.
7. Lack of awareness and appreciation:

There is lack of awareness and appreciation for cold chain systems
especially in the more remote and rural areas where artisanal fishermen
operate. During recent years, low value fishes have dominated the
landings, whereas the contribution of prime varieties of fish has declined.
The inability of the local processing houses to comply with the regulations
has resulted in the rejection of marine/fishery products in the overseas
market. There is an urgent requirement on expanding and strengthening
domestic marketing of fish by supporting fresh fish preservation,
transportation and marketing through hygienic and organized retail outlets.
Large processing units are expanding and modernizing their processing
units which would entail investments in cold chain infrastructure starting
from harvesting of fish to exports. The potential exists in providing cost
effective cold chain solutions starting from ice manufacturing/handling,
refer vans/insulated vehicles and cold storages to improve the quality of
fish.
8.

Figure 21: Top 6 Threats for Indian seafood Industry

CHAPTER 06
EMERGING SOLUTIONS AND STRATEGIES
6.1 HACCP IN THE SEAFOOD INDUSTRY
HACCP programmes in the United States as monitored by the United
States Food and Drug Administration focus on maintaining safety
standards for seafood. That is, safety assurance, not quality assurance, is
the cornerstone of the programme. HACCP programmes in other countries
often include quality standards as well as safety standards in programme
design. In European countries, HACCP is more broadly defined as part of
an overall ISO 9000 quality system. Seafood processing plants can be
certified to meet various ISO 9000 standards. The goal of ISO 9000 is to
achieve quality that ensures the economical production of consistent
products that meet or exceed customer requirements and conformance to
regulation (Bogason 1994). Various levels of ISO-certification can be
achieved ranging from the more comprehensive ISO-9001 (model for
quality assurance in design/development; production; installation; and
servicing) to the simpler ISO-9003 (model for quality assurance in final
inspection and testing). Some key reasons for using ISO standards are to
provide direction, generate ideas for change, design or redesign systems,
implement changes, measure results, and manage change through audits
and reviews (Bogason 1994). The core of the ISO 9000 series of standards
is the standards for quality systems. An organization can certify its quality
system if it meets the demands of one or several of these standards. ISO
9000 describes the demands for a quality system that is to be used for
managing the quality in the entire value chain, from developing products
to delivery and service. The other standards for quality systems contain
parts of this one, and consequently the contents of all the standards can be
described by focusing on ISO 9001. Additional details and a study of the
economic consequences of ISO 9000 is available on industry in Norway
(Stemsrudhagen 1997). While this document focuses principally on
HACCP (and seafood safety), it also covers quality aspects of seafood, and
describes the use of HACCP as a business management tool in an ISO
9000-like context. The use of HACCP in the seafood industry has taken on
a global perspective in the production of fish and fishery products (Lima
dos Santos and Sophonphong 1998). They report the results of an FAO
survey that categorized the status of countries and the seafood industries in
those countries in adopting seafood HACCP procedures. Countries whose
governments and seafood industries which have adopted or decided to
introduce seafood HACCP include Canada, Uruguay, Brazil, Chile,
Ecuador, Australia, New Zealand, Thailand, Iceland, United States and
more recently Argentina, Peru, Ireland, Cuba, Morocco, Norway, Sri
Lanka, Vietnam and Bangladesh. A second group consists of countries
whose governments have taken unilateral initiatives to introduce HACCP
via regulations with limited success and cooperation between the
regulatory authorities and the seafood industry. These countries include
Mexico, Venezuela, and many member countries of the European Union,
for example Italy, Germany and France. In a third group of countries, the
private sector is taking the lead in voluntarily trying to introduce HACCP-
based programmes regarding seafood export production. These include
Madagascar, Venezuela, Honduras, Tunisia, Myanmar and Portugal. A
final group consists of countries where governments have decided to apply
HACCP but have not yet defined the process, including Japan, Russia and
China. Remaining countries where the status of seafood HACCP is unclear
include Pakistan, South Korea, Iran, Colombia, Panama, some East and
Central European countries and most African States.
6.2 HACCP DEFINED

HACCP Defined Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) is a
preventative system of hazard control rather than one of reaction or point
inspection to decrease a hazard. Food processors can use HACCP to
identify hazards, establish controls and monitor the controls in the case of
harmful microorganisms or chemical and/or physical contaminants in
food. The use of the HACCP concept for food has its origin in the United
States space programme in the early 1960s. In order to provide safe food
during space flights, it was determined that a preventative system was best
in order to minimize the risk of food safety hazards, rather than end

product testing. The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
first required HACCP controls for food processing in 1973 for canned
foods to protect against Clostridium botulinum, and recently has been
required for seafood in the United States. HACCP has also been endorsed
worldwide by Codex Alimentarius10, the European Union and by several
countries including Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Japan.
HACCP is based on seven principles:
(1) Conduct hazard analysis and identify preventative measures.
(2) Identify critical control points (CCP).
(3) Establish critical limits.
(4) Monitor each CCP.
(5) Establish corrective action to be undertaken when a critical limit
deviation occurs.
(6) Establish a record keeping system.
(7) Establish verification procedures.
6.3 BLOCKCHAIN
A Block chain-based supply chain network overcomes the issues of
traceability, collaboration, and coordination faced in traditional networks.

Figure 22: Seafood trade transparency

Figure 23: Key Advantages of Block chain in Supply Chain
Management

CHAPTER 07
CONCLUSION
The general overview and case studies presented here provide a glimpse
into how supply chain structures and functions can create challenges (and
offer opportunities) for resource management and sustainability efforts
within Seafood in emerging economies. As with any complex system,
driving positive change within a seafood supply chain requires a deep
understanding of the human and logistical factors that are creating barriers,
and designing solutions that can work in concert with one another over
time to shift behavioral habits. There are no silver bullets, no domino
effects. Instead, multiple challenges must be simultaneously tackled in
order to loosen and free up the entire tangled web. That is easier said than
done, but not impossible. The emerging strategies for progress, based on
preliminary successes within actual fisheries, offer some starting points for
exploration. In addition, we list below several key insights from field
experts, along with some guiding questions, that may help practitioners
design and execute effective engagements that harness the power of supply
chains to build more sustainable fisheries.

REFERENCES
 https://futureoffish.org/sites/default/files/docs/resources/TNC.Seafoo
dSupplyChainReport.V10.Print_.pdf
 https://www.yesbank.in/pdf/indian_sea_food_industry_the_cold_cha
in_prospective.pdf
 http://www.fao.org/3/x0465e/x0465e.pdf
 https://safety4sea.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/DNV-GL-
Deloitte-Blockchain-in-the-seafood-industry-Increasing-
transparency-and-efficiency-in-global-seafood-supply-chains-
2019_03.pdf
 https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/tkn_marine_export_in
dia.pdf
 https://www.fisheriesjournal.com/archives/2015/vol3issue2/PartC/3-
2-34.pdf
 https://www.fda.gov/media/80637/download
 Challenges in Seafood Cold Chain – ColdChainManagement.org
 7 challenges facing future global seafood supply

Seminar Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Seminar Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENTS, RAJASTHAN

TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY, KOTA

7. Chapter 3 : Seafood Supply Chain in INDIA 16

8. Chapter 4 : Structure of Seafood Supply Chain 24

9. Chapter 5 : Supply Chain Challenges 43

10. Chapter 6 : Emerging Solutions And Strategies 52

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 2

S.NO. TITLE PAGE

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 3

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 4

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 5

Figure 2: Imports and exports of fishery commodities (a) worldwide, by area of

Figure 4: Trends in Export of Seafood, 1951–2001 (compounded growth rates in

Figure 6: Indian fishery resource (2013-14)

Figure 8: Top 10 states in fish production (lakh MT) in India (2013-14)

Figure 9: Top 10 states in freshwater aquaculture (lakh MT) in India (2013-14)

Figure 11: Key Players in Domestic Fish Marketing in India

Figure 12: Expenditure Breakdown of an Average Fisherman.

Figure 13: Role of Supply Chain Actors.

Figure 14: Value Chain for Fisheries(Domestic)

Figure 15: Value Chain for Fisheries(Exports)

Figure 17: Processing and Storage Infrastructure in India

Figure 18: Region wise processing facility capacities.

Figure 19: Region wise storage capacities in MT

Figure 20: Marketing Channels

Figure 21: Top 6 Threats for Indian seafood Industry

Figure 22: Seafood trade transparency

Figure 23: Key Advantages of Block chain in Supply Chain Management

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 6

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 7

Though we call it a supply “chain,” there are few products in today’s

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 8

and after landing, wild fish

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 9

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 10

1.2 KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF WILD SEAFOOD SUPPLY

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 11

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 13

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 14

Figure 2: Imports and exports of fishery commodities (a)

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 15

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 16

Figure 3: Fish Production in India (thousand tons)

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 17

Figure 5: Contribution of Seafood to India’s Exports

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 18

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 19

3.3 PRODUCTION TRENDS

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 20

3.3.1 FRESHWATER AQUACULTURE

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 21

3.3.2 BRACKISH WATER AQUACULTURE

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 22

Figure 10: State wise marine fish production (lakh MT) in

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 23

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 24

Figure 11: Key Players in Domestic Fish Marketing in India

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 25

Figure 12: Expenditure Breakdown of an Average Fisherman.

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 26

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 27

| Supply Chain Management Of Sea Food Page 29

4.1.1 SUPPLY CHAIN FOR DOMESTIC MARKET

Figure 14: Value Chain for Fisheries(Domestic)