K. T su k a m o to , T. K aw an u ira, T. Takeuchii, T. D. B eard , Jr. a n d M . J. Kaiser, e d s.

Fisheries fo r C lo b a l W e lfa re a n d E n v iro n m e n t, 5 th W o rld Fisheries C ongress 2 0 0 8 , p p . 4 1 3 - 4 2 3 .

© b y TERRAPUB 2 0 0 8 .

Advantages and Disadvantages of

the Fisheries Trade

Yoshiaki M a t s u d a
F a c u lty o f Fisheries
K a g o sh im a U n iv e rs ity
8 9 0 K a g o sh im a , ja p a n

E-mail: m a ts u d a y 2 0 0 6 @ y a h o o .c o .jp

T he spirit o f t r a d e is m u tu a l b e n efits a m o n g all p a rticip a n ts . EHowever, c u r r e n t in te rn a ­

tional t r a d e is ju st like a z e ro - s u m so lu tio n with w i n n e r s a n d losers a n d d e v e l o p i n g a
feelin g of distrust a m o n g p a rticip a n ts . R e sp o n sib le in te rn atio n al fisheries t r a d e is an
i m p o r t a n t tool to p r o m o t e e c o n o m i c g ro w th o f m a n y c o u n tr i e s a n d t h e W o r ld T rade
O r g a n i z a ti o n (W T O ) has b e e n e n c o u r a g i n g fre e t r a d e as a p a r t of glo baliza tion . Al­
t h o u g h fre e t r a d e is ideal w h e n t h e w o rld is fair a n d e q u it a b le , c u r r e n t inte rn ation al
t r a d e in favor o f capital has d iv ers e e ffe cts a n d has b o t h positiv e a n d n e g a tiv e a s p e c t s ,
b u t is n o t fair a n d e q u it a b le b e t w e e n p a r tic ip a n ts in b o t h p r o d u c i n g a n d c o n s u m i n g
c o u n trie s . Profit-seeking capital b e h a v i o r is differe nt fro m c o m m u n i t y b e h a v i o r re­
quiring su stainability a n d th e role o f g o v e r n m e n t is to b a l a n c e t h e s e tw o e x tr e m e s ,
c o n tinu a lly m a in ta in in g vital c o m m u n i ti e s . EHowever, m a n y g o v e r n m e n ts includ ing
official d e v e l o p m e n t a s s is ta n c e (O D A ) have b e e n in fa v or of capital t o o m u c h to
sustain rural fishing c o m m u n i t i e s a n d d e v e l o p i n g c o u n tr i e s h a v e b e e n r e p e a ti n g th e
s a m e p r o b l e m s as d e v e l o p e d c o u n tr i e s ha v e e x p e r i e n c e d . This p a p e r revie w s c a s e s
of t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t fisheries t r a d e c o m m o d i ti e s : shrim p, tu n a a n d sa lm o n. All c a s e s
in d ic a te t h e e x is te n c e of n e g a tiv e a s p e c t s of t h e fisheries trade. G o v e r n m e n t s as trus­
tee s o f p e o p l e a re e x p e c t e d to r e m o v e o r r e d u c e t h e s e n e g a tiv e a s p e c t s of inte rna ­
tional t r a d e a n d to think o f t h e i m p o r t a n c e of t h e c o m m u n i ty .

KEYW O RD S fisheries trad e ; sh rim p trade ; tu n a trade; sa l m o n trade ; J a p a n 's fish

trad e

coastal countries took fisheries expansion

1. In trodu ction
With development of the 3rd United Nations
Law of the Sea Conference together with LIS
dollar devaluation, increase in oil prices, and
free trade movement in the 1970s, many
policies for exports emphasizing foreign ex­
change earnings, increases of employment
opportunities, improvement of sanitation/
food safety/transparency of management/
fishers’ income and living standard (Matsuda
1984, 1987, 1992, 1995).
414 Y. M atsuda
These policies were also supported by
developed countries and further facilitated
by the Plaza Agreement in 1985 which pro­
moted a drastic appreciation of the yen. In
many coastal countries, fishing fee incomes
and fisheries joint-ventures were increased.
This resulted in increases in conflicts be­
tween traditional coastal fisheries and new
fisheries. At the same time, distant-water
fishing suffered from it due to increases in
cost associated with labor and fuel in par­
ticular. In tlie 1980s, environmental problems
became obvious due to economic growth
policies in many coastal countries. These
fisheries production policies also faced over­
investment, over-fishing and resource deple­
tion problems (FAO 1992). Legal frame­
works of international regulations were
strengthened in the 1990s, and now fisher­
ies are in transition (Willman 2006). FAO’s
Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries
concerns all aspects in fisheries management,
fishing operation, aquaculture, integration of
fisheries into coastal area management, post­
harvest practices, trade and fisheries re­
search. Although the Code is voluntary and
global in scope, certain parts of it are based
on relevant rules of international law, includ­
ing tlie LTNCLOS and contains provisions
that may be or have already been given bind­
ing effect by means of other obligatory legal
instruments amongst tlie parties such as tlie
Agreement to Promote Compliance with In­
ternational Conservation and Management
Measures by Fishing Vessels on the High
Seas, 1993 (FAO 1995).
In 2005, world fisheries imports ac­
counted for LTS$ 81,529 million while ex­
ports accountedforLTS$78,419million. The
fisheries trade is very important for devel­
oping countries in tenns of exports while it
accounts for a considerable proportion of im­
ports in developed countries. The top 15 ex­
porting countries include China (US$ 7,519
million), followed by Norway, Thailand, the
LISA, Denmark, Canada, Chile, the Nether­
lands, Vietnam, Spain, Russian Federation,
tlie UK, Indonesia, Iceland and Taiwan. On
tlie other hand, the top 15 importing coun­
tries include Japan with import values of
LTS$ 14,436 million, followed by tlie LISA,
Spain, France, Italy, China, Germany, the
LK, Denmark, South Korea, the Nether­
lands, Hong Kong, Canada, Belgium and
Sweden. The shares of these top 15 coun­
tries in total fish trade values in the world
are LTS$ 48,567 million or 61.9% for exports
against LTS$ 65,007 million or 79.7% for
imports (FAO 2007). Thus, exports are more
diversified as compared to imports concen­
trated on Japan, the LISA and ELI countries.
China has become a new market for fisher­
ies commodities. Traditional fish trades
within a region have also been accelerated
by free trade agreements (FTA) (Yamao
2006). Shrimp, tuna and salmon are still tlie
major species in the fisheries trade. This pa­
per focuses on these species.
Joint-venture is an ideal fonn of capi­
tal-intensive fisheries development in devel­
oping countries where the developed coun­
tries provide tlie capital and technology at
tlie beginning while the developing countries
provide tlie working environment and labor
(Martin el al. 1981). These fisheries joint-
ventures have increased rapidly since the
1970s. However, many failed within 10 to
20 years. This is because of distrust among
partners in terms of joint-venture business
management, difficulty in technology trans­
fer pertaining to preparation, education, pro­
duction, processing, marketing and manage­
ability as well as hastened nationalization.
These create joint-ventures high risk low
return businesses (Matsuda and Ouclii 1984).
International trade has affected both fish­
ing and aquaculture. In particular, capital in­
tensive activities have been promoted by
many countries. As a result, fisheries man­
agement and environmental and/or commu­
nity problems have become serious. Regional
tuna fisheries management organizations
such as ICCAT suffer from false reporting
and data collection problems from unreported
 A d v a n ta g e and d isa d va ta g e o f th e fish e rie s trad e
fishermen catching tuna (ICCAT 1996). FAO
has tried to promote responsible fisheries
worldwide since 1995 (FAO 1995). On the
other hand, the Organization for the Promo­
tion of Responsible Tuna Fisheries, anNGO,
was established in 2000 and promoted tlie
removal of IUU (Illegal, Unregulated and
Unreported) vessels, capacity reduction of
over-fishing vessels, promotion of respon­
sible tuna aquaculture and reduction of by-
catches and/or incidental catches. IUU/FOC
(Flag of Convenience) vessels are pirate fish­
ing vessels that operate and overexploit tuna
resources, disregarding international rules
for the conservation and management of tlie
resources. With the introduction of the Posi­
tive List system, international trading of tuna
caught by ILTJ/FOC vessels has been pro­
hibited since November 2003 (OPRT 2008).
The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC),
established in 1997 (MSC 2008), is another
international NGO which promotes respon­
sible fisheries. The MSC recognizes, via a
certificate program, well-managed fisheries
and harmless consumer preference for sea­
food products bearing the MSC label of ap­
proval. Characteristics of these NGOs are
strong concerns about whole situations from
production to processing, marketing and con­
sumption, rather than a part such as produc­
tion.
2. Shrimp
Shrimp exports have been particularly im­
portant as a source of foreign exchange earn­
ings, income generation and employment in
developing countries such as Vietnam, In­
donesia, India, Thailand, China, Burma, the
Philippines, Bangladesh, Columbia, Ecua­
dor, Honduras, N icaragua and M exico.
W orld shrim p production in 2005 was
6,230,000 tonnes consisting of 3,650,000
tonnes from capture fisheries and 2,680,000
tonnes from aquaculture. Major shrimp ex­
porting countries include Thailand with
LTS$ 1.2 trillion in 2001, followed by Indo­
415
nesia, India, Vietnam, Mexico, Argentine,
Ecuador, China and Bangladesh while ma­
jor importing countries include tlie LISA with
LTS$ 3 trillion in 2001, followed by Japan,
Spain, France Canada, Italy, the LTK, the
Netherlands, Belgium and Thailand (FAO
2007). Thailand imports shrimp for process­
ing, then exports tlie final products to devel­
oped countries. Thus, shrimp has been a typi­
cal trade item produced in the south and ex­
ported to the north with the assistance from
developed countries resulting in capital and
technology transfer (FAO 2007).
The major investment for shrimp cap­
ture fisheries is the requirement for capital
intensive shrimp trawl vessels. Since the
1970s, many coastal countries have pro­
moted such industrial fisheries in ways of
joint-venture, state enterprise, private enter­
prise or foreign fishing with fishing fee. This
policy in developing countries attracted of­
ficial development assistance (ODA) as well
as private development assistance from de­
veloped countries. These arrangements con­
tributed to coastal developing countries in
terms of foreign exchange earnings, technol­
ogy transfer, increases in employment op­
portunities for local people, income genera­
tion for people concerned and fostering do­
mestic shrimp fisheries (FAO Regional Of­
fice for Asia and Pacific 2008).
However, this industry also created
problems such as over-fishing and resource
depletion, increasing by-catches, incidental
mortality of sensitive species such as turtle,
illegal fishing, encroachment of coastal fish­
eries resulting in conflicts with coastal fish­
eries, developm ent of incom e disparity
among fishermen and high risk. Thai trawl
fisheries depleted most of the shrimp re­
sources in tlie Gulf of Thailand during the
1960s. In Indonesia, trawl fisheries were
banned at tlie beginning of 1980 except for
improved trawl nets such as turtle excluding
devices (Indonesian Gov. 1980). This is at­
tributable to increasing by-catches, resource
depletion and conflicts with local fishermen.
416 Y. M atsuda
However, these improved gears were not
practical. In the Philippines, the conflicts
between shrimp trawlers and coastal fishers
have continued. The situation is complicated.
Coastal fishermen in San Miguel Bay have
suffered from resource depletion due to the
encroachment of industrial shrimp trawlers
into the coastal fishing grounds. However,
shrimp trawl vessel owners are often bosses
in the villages and the young sons of coastal
fishermen are employed by such industrial
fisheries. Although fisheries officers recog­
nize tlie problem, they never help small-scale
coastal fishermen because they are afraid of
their bosses (Lim el al. 1995).
Aquaculture is another way to meet de­
mands for shrimp. Artificial propagation
technology of Penaeus japonicas, a temper­
ate species of Kuruma shrimp, was devel­
oped by Gensaku Fijinaga in Japan in 1964
and this technology was successfully applied
by a Taiwanese scientist to Penaeus monodon,
a tropical species of the Kuruma shrimp, in
1968. This was a breakthrough of shrimp
culture in the world. In tlie 1970s, shrimp
culture was paid much attention by many
developing countries such as Ecuador, Indo­
nesia, India, Vietnam and Taiwan. In the
Philippines, the Southeast Asian Fisheries
Development Center Aquaculture Depart­
ment was established and emphasized shrimp
production technology. This was a prepara­
tion period for the shrimp culture industry
in tlie world. Shrimp culture for export pur­
poses has grown rapidly since the 1980s.
Current shrimp culture includes more
than 17 species, but are dominated by two
major species: Penaeus monodon (Giant Ti­
ger Prawn) in the Eastern hemisphere and
Penaeus vannamei (Wliiteleg shrimp) in tlie
Western hemisphere. By 2000, cultured
shrimp production exceeded 1.1 m illion
tonnes as compared to 2.7 million tonnes in
2005. World production has been increased,
but rise and fall fluctuations of this industry
have been well documented due to the out­
break of disease problems caused by virus
diseases including the so-called white spot
disease. Production dropped in Taiwan from
16,715 tonnes in 1985 to 2,459 tonnes in
2001 due to the outbreak of M onodon
Baculovirus (MBV) in 1988; in the Philip­
pines from 88,850 tonnes in 1995 to 36,859
tonnes in 1998; and in Ecuador from 129,600
tonnes in 1998 to 50,110 tonnes in 2000 due
to the Taura Syndrome virus (TS V) in 1998.
More than 20 virus diseases have been iden­
tified by now and caused high risk for tlie
industry. Indonesia, Thailand, India, Vietnam
and M exico are also suffering (Fukano
2004). Thus, capital-intensive shrimp culture
is a typical high-risk high-return farming,
though shrimp culture in Vietnam and China
has recently been growing rapidly.
The disease problem is also associated
with problems of mangrove destruction, drug
use and w ater pollution. D uring 1980
through 2005, 3.6 million hectares of man­
grove were destroyed in the world. This is
equivalent to 20% of tlie mangrove areas in
1980, though the speed of this destruction
has slowed down from 185,000 hectares per
year in tlie 1980s to 105,000 hectares per year
after 2000 (Worldwatch Institute 2006).
Some of these mangroves were destroyed for
the development of shrimp culture ponds
though a large portion of mangrove destruc­
tion is related to logging and charcoal pro­
duction, local self-consumption as well as
tlie Vietnam war before 1980. Due to the dis­
ease problem, 150,000 hectares of shrimp
ponds converted from mangrove were aban­
doned in Asia from 1985 to 1995. Some of
these abandoned ponds are currently used for
extensive or semi-intensive polyculture of
shrimp with milkfish, tilapia, rabbit fish, mud
crabs, seaweeds and mangroves, as well as
for mangrove rehabilitation projects in vari­
ous countries such as Ecuador, Thailand, In­
donesia, and the Philippines.
Apart from the disease problem, capi­
tal-intensive export-oriented shrimp culture
has been criticized in many ways (Taya
2003). These include the following:
 A d v a n ta g e and d isa d va ta g e o f th e fish e rie s trad e
1) Government-supported industrial capi­
tal-intensive shrimp culture has worked
at a cost to tlie local community. These
include mangrove destruction resulting
in land acquisition with extremely low
prices for local residents, no trespassing,
depletion of fisheries resources, flood­
ing, increases of natural hazards such as
damages from storms, high tide and
earthquakes, and destruction of self-suf­
ficiency;
2) Water and soil pollution due to heavy
feeding, disease and drug use, resulting
in abandonment of those ponds in Tai­
wan, the Philippines, Indonesia, Thai­
land, Equador;
3) Little contribution to the local economy
since tlie industry’s interest is in her own
profits and not the benefits of the com­
munity;
4) Irreversible conversion of rice paddies
to brackish water shrimp ponds in Viet­
nam and China in particular;
5) Hike of domestic shrimp prices. Shrimps
used to be a common seafood for local
people at reasonable prices. However,
tlie price for exports has been set much
higher than the domestic one. As a re­
sult, the availability of shrimps domes­
tically has decreased and the price has
increased.
Some of the abandoned shrimp ponds
have been used by local residents for exten­
sive or semi-intensive polyculture in the Phil­
ippines. However, people are very interested
in shrimp culture because tlie average price
is seven times higher than milkfish, though
mortality rates are more than 90% due to tlie
disease problem. The current marketing sys­
tem is unable to separate healthy shrimps
from those contaminated by virus and oth­
ers.
In Vietnam, shrimp culture is a very di­
verse industry. Small-scale fanns occupy 90%
with an extensive production of 200 kg/ha
as compared to an intensive production of
10-15 tonnes/ha and there are 439 process­
417
ing plants of which 300 are accredited by
the HACCP for export. However, they have
the following problems (Muroya 2006):
1) Difficulty of collecting both brooders
and exportable shrimp: Availability of
hatchery technology is limited and most
fanners are small-scale so that each pur­
chase is a small lot of several kilograms.
Further, traceability is very difficult due
to a mixture of shrimp from many fann­
ers including all categories of fanning
such as extensive, semi-intensive and
intensive culture;
2) Insufficiency of feed and drug manage­
ment even among capital-intensive
fanns;
3) Insufficiency of understanding about
water management, food safety and sani­
tation;
4) Lack of appropriate infrastructures such
as electricity and roads ;
5) Low investment capability;
6) Lack of technology and information con­
cerned.
Lobster is an important export item in
Nicaragua. Accordingly, diving fisheries for
lobster are popular among natives (Masito).
However, fishing grounds have been chang­
ing to deeper zones from 30 feet in 1988 to
120 feet in 1998. As a result, the occurrence
of decompression sickness increased among
divers. Some became physically handi­
capped and some lost their lives. To prevent
such cases, there are many laws, rules and
regulations, but there is no enforcement. The
government is in favor of tlie industry but
appears to have less concern about local resi­
dents (Acosta 2005).
3. Tuna
In the 1970s, many coastal countries intro­
duced fisheries expansion policies to in­
crease foreign exchange earnings (Matsuda,
1986, 1987). Although tuna had been re­
garded as a highly migratory species in the
UNCLOS III, many coastal countries, in
418 Y. M atsuda
particular South Pacific island countries,
declared that those within their Exclusive
Econom ic Zone (EEZ) belonged to the
coastal countries. The Forum Fishery Agency
established in 1979, took a leading role in
regional fisheries management in tlie South
Pacific, based on tlie Nauru Agreement in
1982. This was materialized after a multilat­
eral agreement between the USA and 16 Pa­
cific island countries in 1987 (Matsuda 1992,
1995). Their management concept is re­
garded as enforcement without force (Moore
1987). Most tuna caught in the waters were
shipped to the tuna markets in Japan, the
USA and EU, since local people did not cus­
tomarily eat large tuna except small skipjack
tuna.
Many countries developed tuna fisher­
ies joint-ventures for export purposes in vein
mainly due to distrust in business manage­
ment between partners and hasty nationali­
zation, and some resulted in ethnic violence
such as in Solomon Islands in 1998. Solo­
mon Taiyo in the Solomon Islands was re­
garded as a successful tuna fisheries joint-
venture between the government of tlie Solo­
mon Islands and the Taiyo Gyogyo Company
in Japan, lasting from 1971 to 2000. The
company was involved in fishing, process­
ing and marketing. By 1984, the company
exported Solomon$ 29 million, 97% of tlie
total fisheries export value in the Solomon
Islands and equivalent to one-third of for­
eign exchange earnings, and employed about
1,000 people which is about 5% of total
employment in the country (Matsuda 1986).
Solomon Taiyo grew 1999, when it had an
annual turnover of around US$ 100 million,
employed close to 3,000 Solomon Islanders
on its fleet of more than 20 fishing boats,
and had a large shore base with a canning
factory. Barclay describes tlie neutral evalu­
ation of Solomon Taiyo (Barclay 2007).
There are two extremes in tlie concept
of fisheries management. One is complete
government control, popular in Western
countries (Rigg el al. 2003), and the other is
comanagement between government and
fishermen, popular in Japan (Matsuda 2002,
2005) which has adopted by Organization for
tlie Promotion of Responsible Tuna Fisher­
ies (OPRT) and Marine Stewardship Coun­
cil (MSC). Comanagement could also be fa­
cilita ted by d ec en traliza tio n policies
(Fernandes el al. 2000; Satria and Matsuda
2004; Kooiman el al. 2005; McClamialian
and Castilla 2007). Under government con­
trol, fishermen are regarded as persons un­
der surveillance while they are regarded as
partners with the government under the
comanagement approach. Assuming uncer­
tainty in fisheries, monitoring, control and
surveillance (MCS) costs without tlie under­
standing of the fishermen will be very high.
Activities are limited by budgets or by tlie
amount of benefits from tlie fisheries. The
MCS cost could be reduced drastically un­
der the comanagement approach.
Narita International Airport in Japan is
also known as Narita fishing port which re­
ceives both fresh, frozen and processed fish.
However, all cultured tuna are from a lim­
ited number of countries such as Australia,
Spain, Malta, Turkey, Croatia, Italy, Tuni­
sia, Cyprus, Greece and Fibya. These fish
used to be fresh for Sashimi market through
fish wholesale markets in Japan, but nearly
half of them are not handled through fish
wholesale markets today (Yamamoto 2006).
On the other hand, tlie National Federation
of Tuna and Skipjack Fisheries Cooperative
(NIKKATSUREN), the most active tuna
fisheries cooperative federation in Japan, was
forced to close in 2004 due to financial prob­
lems. A positive list system was introduced
in tlie bluefin tuna trade by ICCAT in 2004.
This is because pro d u ctio n of tuna
aquaculture in the Mediterranean Sea in­
creased from 14,000 tonnes in 1994 to
21,000 tonnes in 2003. Under-sized juvenile
fish are also used for this aquaculture and
competition between capture fisheries and
aquaculture has increased.
 A d v a n ta g e and d isa d va ta g e o f th e fish e rie s trad e
4. Salm on
Both natural and cultured salmon production
has been increasing since 1975. In particu­
lar, capital-intensive cultured salmon pro­
duced by agri-businesses in the world in­
creased rapidly from 17,000 tonnes in 1980
to 200,000 tonnes in 1990. This is attribut­
able to increased production in Norway.
During this period, demands for salmon
changed from salted salmon to frozen salmon
in Japan and canned salmon to frozen salmon
in the United States and EU markets Major
producing countries are the United States,
Japan, Russia, Canada for natural salmon:
Pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha),
Sockeye salm on (Oncorhynchus nelka),
Chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta), Silver
salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch), and Chinock
salmon (Oncorhynchus tschawytscha), while
Norway, Chile, the UK, Canada, Feroe Is­
lands, Finland, Ireland, the USA, Japan,
Australia, Denmark, Sweden, New Zealand
and Iceland produce cultured salmon: Atlan­
tic salmon, trout, silver salmon, Chinock
salmon. Since 1997, cultured salmon produc­
tion has exceeded that of natural salmon.
These cultured salmon are basically for ex­
port and not for domestic consumption (Sano
2003).
Alaska in tlie United States, Norway and
Chile are the major salmon exporters in tlie
world although Alaska is based on natural
salmon production while Norway and Chile
dom inate cultured salm on production.
Alaska is the major natural salmon produc­
ing area in the United States. The salmon
industry provides one-sixth of all employ­
ment opportunities there. Major species are
Sockeye salmon and Pink salmon in Bristol
Bay and southwest Alaska caught by seine
(Silver salmon), gillnet in Bristol Bay and
purse seine in southwest Alaska. The mar­
ket is Japan. They face a very short fishing
season, m arketing problem s, resource
m anagem ent problem s, low prices and
over-investment.
419
In Norway, fisheries products are an im­
portant export item, second to oil and oc­
cupy 7% of foreign exchange earnings of the
country. Most of them are exported to EU
countries. The salmon culture industry con­
tributes 3% of its exported value to tlie Fish
Export Council and salmon export is re­
garded as a national interest and the govern­
ment fully supports tlie industry. In 1979, the
government enacted an aquaculture law and
started a cooperative experiment with the
Nicliiro Gyogyo Company of Japan. In 1989,
the government liberalized aquaculture capi­
tal. In 1991, it adopted an individual trans­
ferable licensing system and targeted a pro­
duction system with a feed conversion ratio
of 1.3:1, concentration on export up to 98%
and introduction of anew technological sys­
tem including breeding, prevention of epi­
demics with vaccine, feed quota system,
computer-based management, waste treat­
ment, fresh product production for EU coun­
tries, HACCP (Hazard Analysis Critical Con­
trol Point), mechanization, year-round mar­
keting, and agri-business oriented manage­
ment. In 2004, they produced 1 million
tonnes of cultured salmon. Weaknesses of
Norwegian salmon culture are as follows
(Sano 2003; WWF 2004):
1) Oligopoly: More than 800 management
units in 1992 were reduced to 270 in
1999 and the top six groups produce
three-quarters of the total production,
resulting in price-war situations;
2) No domestic market for cultured salmon,
resulting in high risk;
3) Rising of the license price due to lim­
ited numbers of licenses;
4) Increasing international competition,
lowering profit margins;
5) High-risk high-return to high-risk low-
retum industry;
6) Escaped fanned salmon resulting in a
creation of genetic disturbance;
7) Depletion of wild Atlantic salmon by
80% between 1970 to the end of tlie 20th
century in the North Atlantic Ocean. A
420 Y. M atsuda
reason for this is suspected to be attrib­
utable to the salmon culture.
In Chile, there are many suitable places
for salmon culture and high availability of
low price feeds. With Japan’s cooperation, a
salmon culture experiment was started in
1980. At the same time, they introduced
aquaculture technology from Norway. After
trial and error, they adopted the capital-in­
tensive Norwegian aquaculture method. The
license is issued by the military government.
A distance between two adjacent fanns is
restricted to more than 1.5 km. Enlargement
of fann size is promoted and optimization
of the production scale from 800 to 18,000
tonnes per year. As a result, the top ten com­
panies produced half of the total cultured
salmon in 1998. Further, a value addition for
market differentiation was promoted for At­
lantic salmon to the EU market and Silver
salmon and trout for Japan. In 2004, they
produced 440,000 tonnes of cultured salmon.
A lthough C hilean salm on culture
learned a lot from its Norwegian counterpart,
several problem s have been identified
(S akuma 2007; Takahashi 2007; Hayashi
2007):
1) Use of wild caught fish for fish-feed with
a low feed conversion ratio: 8.6 kg of
wild caught sardine, anchovy, and horse
mackerel are used as feeds to produce
lkg of cultured salmon;
2) Pollution: Coastal capture fisheries have
become non-existence in 10 provinces
where salmon culture is very popular;
3) Use of pesticides and antibiotics: There
is no inspection on this matter;
4) Defective legal system resulting in vic­
timization of health and the lives of
laborers;
5) Weak enforcement capability;
6) Widening of income disparity;
7) Increasing abnormal cultured salmon
due to feeding of heads and bones of cul­
tured salmon.
5. Issues in Im ported C ountries:
A C ase o f Japan
Japan experienced a rise and fall in fisheries
after WWII. It used to be an exporting coun­
try of fisheries commodities. However, tlie
situation changed in 1975 and it became an
importing country, resulting in it becoming
tlie top importer in tlie 1980s. In 1997, Ja­
pan imported 1.9 billion yen (3.4 million mt),
next to oil imports of about 5 billion yen.
This is the result of dollar devaluation be­
ginning with tlie Nixon shock in 1971, GATT
Tokyo round 1973-1979 reducing tariffs and
treating fisheries coimnodities as non-agri-
cultural coimnodities, just like automobiles
and televisions, the development of tlie Third
Law of the Sea Conference, export expan­
sion policy for textile, automobile and elec­
tric commodities, and life-style changes. As
a result, her self-sufficiency rate of fisheries
commodities decreased from 100% in 1975
to 57% in 2005, even though her compara­
tive advantages as a maritime country with
35,000 km of coastline, long history and ex­
periences in fisheries, the sixth largest ex­
clusive economic zone of 4.47 million km2
including one of the three richest fishing
grounds in the world, and both hard and soft
fisheries infrastructures (Matsuda, 2006).
Fisheries production decreased from
12.8 m illion tonnes at its peak in 1984 to
5.8 million tonnes in 2005 in volume with a
drop in value from 2.98 billion yen in 1982
to 1.60 billion in 2004. The number of fish­
ermen decreased from 1,990,453 in 1952 at
independence to 231,000 in 2004 and the
number of fishing vessel construction li­
censes decreased from 1,521 in 1963 to 26 in
2005. As a result, expected contributions of
fisheries and fishing villages to society, such
as renewable resources utilization, environ­
mental protection, protection of lives and the
assets of people (like rescue, surveillance and
environmental monitoring), places for ma­
rine recreation and education, succession of
 A d v a n ta g e and d isa d va ta g e o f th e fish e rie s trad e
culture such as festivities and economic and
employment opportunities in remote areas
have been reducing. Japanese fisheries face
tlie unprecedented crisis.
On the other hand, people have been ur­
banized, life styles have changed from slow
food to fast food and tlie installation of home
refrigerators since tlie 1960s. There has been
technological developments in the handling
of food in cols storages with temperatures
of up to -65°C. Supermarkets became popu­
lar and frozen fish transactions outside cen­
tral fish wholesale markets increased. Con­
venience stores and fast food sushi restau­
rants became popular in the 1980s and sushi
became one of the children’s favorites, just
like carry and rice, noodles, hamburgers and
Kentucky Fried Chicken. These supermar­
kets and fast food sushi restaurants use im­
ported frozen fish because of stability in
quality, volume and price. Consumers have
preferred ready-to-cook or ready-to-eat fish
to fresh wholesome fish. The restaurant busi­
ness grew to 29.1 billion yen by 1997 at its
peak, then decreased to 25.6 billion yen in
2002. Sushi shares about 5% in restaurants
(Toni 2006). Westernization of food has re­
sulted in malnutrition problems. Together
with BSE (mad cow disease), bird influenza,
swine cholera, poisoned imported food and
camouflage of labels, these have encouraged
people to change their eating habits toward
domestic food consumption and to become
more conscious about the quality of food,
food safety and reliable food.
6. C on clu sion
Free trade is desirable in tlie long term, but
too early to practice without market failures.
The spirit of trade is for the mutual benefit
of participants which creates mutual tmst.
These participants today are all related par­
ties in the trade including not only sellers
and buyers but also people concerned in pro­
duction, processing, marketing and commu­
nities. However, issues raised here are com­
421
mon rather than specific and current trade
supported by governments in fact is in favor
of profit-seeking capital and not in a
sustainability seeking community. As a re­
sult, winners are created for capital and los­
ers for the community in the name of com­
petition. This is a market failure with high
risks for a country, resulting in high social
costs and not a responsible trade at all. Thus,
the role of governments is the reallocation
of capital-biased benefit to mutual benefit
in optimal ways, though not losing incen­
tives. However, this government role is not
functioning in many countries. Developing
countries have also been repeating the same
problems as developed countries experi­
enced in the past and missing tlie opportu­
nity to take advantage of starting late.
Advantages for fish exporting countries
include foreign exchange earnings, employ­
ment opportunities, education in sanitation/
food safety/transparency of management,
higher fishermen's incomes, resulting in an
increase in living standards of fishers, though
levels of achievement are biased towards
foreign exchange earnings and business prof­
its. Those of fish importing countries include
an increase in availability of cheaper primary
species, benefiting consumers and related
processing and marketing people and com­
panies such as supermarkets; and an expan­
sion of export opportunities for exporting
industries of other commodities such as cars
and electrical goods.
Disadvantages for exporting countries
include the creation of a dual structure in
fisheries, taking over land at low prices by
the government for industrial development,
environmental destruction such as the de­
struction of mangrove resulting in resource
depletion, increases of natural hazards and
destruction of self-sufficiency; water and
land pollution; no contribution to the village
communities concerned; high risk of indus­
trial fisheries development, transfer of rice
paddies to irreversible shrimp ponds; disease
and drug use problems, and rise of domestic
422 Y. M atsuda

prices of related species. Those of import­ make critical contributions to society.

ing countries include the destruction of fresh- Governments as trustees of people are
fish marketing and consumption, promoting expected to remove or reduce these negative
an energy-intensive mass consumption so­ aspects of international trade and to think of
ciety just seeking convenience and the de­ tlie importance of communities.
struction of rural fishing communities which

R eferen ces

A c o s ta ML. N ic a ra g u a -L e g a l in s tru m e n ts in e ffe c tiv e , In : K o o im a n J, B av in ck M , J e n to ff S, Pullin R (e d s ). Fish

fo r L ife : In te ra c tiv e G o v e rn a n c e fo r Fisheries, A m s te rd a m U n iv e rs ity P ress. 2 0 0 5 ; 1 8 8 - 1 8 9 .
B arclay K. Fishing, W e ste rn , Japanese a n d Is la n d e r P e rc e p tio n s o f E c o lo g y a n d M o d e r n iz a tio n in th e P a cific.
J a p a n F o c u s. 2 0 0 7 ; 1 - 2 5 .
FAO. The S ta te o f F o o d a n d A g r ic u ltu r e 1 9 9 2 : M a rin e Fisheries a n d th e L a w o f th e Sea. A D e c a d e o f C ha n g e.
FAO A g ric u ltu re S e rie s 2 5 . R o m e . 1 9 9 2 .
FAO. C o d e o f C o n d u c t fo r R e s p o n s ib le F ish eries. 1 9 9 5 .
FAO. F ishS tat. 2 0 0 7 .
FAO R eg io n al O ffic e fo r A sia a n d P acific. T h e h is to ry o f in d u stria l fis h e rie s in S o u th e a s t A sia: T raw ling.
2 0 0 8 . [O n lin e ] h t t p : / / w w w . f a o .o r g / d o c r e p / 0 1 0 / a g l 2 2 e / A G l 2 2 E 0 5 .h tm
F e rn a n d e z PR Jr, M a ts u d a Y, S u b a d e RF. C o a s ta l A re a G o v e r n a n c e S y ste m in th e P h ilip p in e s. /. E nviron.
D e v e lo p . 2 0 0 0 ; 9 (4 ): 341 - 3 6 9 .
F u k a n o N . A tr e n d a n a ly sis o f w o rld s h rim p a q u a c u ltu r e ./. Int. Fish. 2 0 0 4 ; 6 (1 /2 ) : 4 3 - 5 4 (in J a p a n e s e ).
H a y ash i K. In te rv ie w o n 2 Ju ly 2 0 0 7 .
ICCAT. P r o c e e d in g s o f th e ICCA T T u n a S y m p o s iu m , P o n ta D e lg a d a , J u n e 1 0 -1 8, 1 9 9 6 .
In d o n e s ia n G o v e rn m e n t. P re s id e n tia l D e c r e e N o . 3 9 . 1 9 8 0 .
In d o n e s ia n G o v e rn m e n t. P re s id e n tia l In s tru c tio n N o . 1 1 . 1 9 8 2 .
K o o im a n J, B av in ck M , J e n to f f S, Pullin R (e d s). Fish fo r Life. A m s te rd a m U n iv e rs ity P ress. 2 0 0 5 ; 4 2 7 p p .
Lim C, M a ts u d a Y, S h ig e m i Y. P ro b le m s a n d c o n s tr a in ts in m a rin e fis h e rie s: T h e c a s e o f S an M ig u re l Bay,
C a m a r in e s Sur. E n v iro n m e n ta l M a n a g e m e n t 1 9 9 5 ; 7: 8 3 5 - 8 5 2 .
M a r te n G , M a ts u d a Y, B a rd a c h J, C o m itin i S, H a rd jo lu k ito S. A S tra te g ic G o a l A n alysis o f O p tio n s fo r T una
L o n g lin e J o in t-V e n tu re s in S o u th e a s t A sia: I n d o n e s ia - J a p a n C a s e S tudy. E ast-W est E n v iro n m e n t a n d
P o licy In s titu te R e s e a rc h R e p o r t N o . 3. 1 981 ; 7 4 p p .
M a ts u d a Y. T u n a a n d s k ip ja c k fis h e rie s in th e P acific Isla n d s w a te r s : Issu e s a n d th e ro le o f J a p a n . In : J a p a n
In te rn a tio n a l F ish e rie s R e s e a rc h S o c ie ty (e d ). S tu d y o n In te r n a tio n a l Fisheries. K o u se is h a K o seik ak u :
1 9 8 6 ; 1 0 7 - 1 5 2 (in J a p a n e s e ).
M a ts u d a Y. P o s tw a r d e v e l o p m e n t a n d e x p a n s io n o f J a p a n 's tu n a fish e ry . In : D o u lm a n DJ (e d ). Funa Issues
a n d P e rsp e ctive s in th e P a c ific Isla nd s R e g io n . E ast-W est C e n te r, (P u b lic a tio n P la c e ). 1 9 8 7 ; 71 - 9 1 .
M a ts u d a Y. C h a n g e s in tu n a fis h e rie s n e g o tia tio n s b e tw e e n J a p a n a n d th e P acific Isla n d s n a tio n s . In : M a rsh
JB. R eso u rce s a n d E n v iro n m e n t in A s ia 's M a rin e S e c to r. T aylor & F rancis, N e w Y ork. 1 9 9 2 ; 41 - 5 7 .
M a ts u d a Y. 1 9 9 5 . T h e in te rn a tio n a l p e r s p e c tiv e o n tu n a fis h e rie s m a n a g e m e n t in W e s te rn C e n tra l p a cific
u n d e r th e U N C L O S III fra m e w o rk , P r o c e e d in g s o f th e 7 th IIFET B iennial C o n f e r e n c e , T aipei, 1 8 - 2 1
July, 1 9 9 4 ; 2 0 4 - 2 2 2 .
M a ts u d a Y. A P E C 's c o n tr ib u tio n to s u s ta in a b le fis h e rie s in th e re g io n , S e o u l O c e a n S e m in a r o f t h e 1 st APEC
O c e a n - r e la te d M in isterial M e e tin g : T o w a rd s th e S u s ta in a b lity o f M a rin e a n d C o a s ta l R e s o ru c e s , K orea
M a ritim e In s titu te a n d M in istry o f M a ritim e A ffairs a n d F ish e rie s. 2 0 0 2 ; 5 7 - 7 1 .
M a ts u d a Y. T o w a rd th e e s ta b lis h m e n t o f B asic M a ritim e Law w ith R e s p o n s ib le F ish e rie s: From th e J a p a n e s e
in te rn a tio n a l c o n tr ib u tio n p o in t o f v iew , C a k u s h ik a i K a ih o 2 0 0 6 ; N o . 8 5 6 : 4 4 - 5 0 (in J a p a n e s e ).
M a ts u d a Y, O tic h i K. Legal, p o litic a l a n d e c o n o m ic c o n s tr a in ts o n J a p a n e s e s tra te g ie s fo r d is ta n t-w a te r tu n a
a n d sk ip ja c k fis h e rie s in S o u th e a s t A sian S e a s a n d th e W e s te rn C e n tra l P acific. M e m . K a g o s h im a U niv.
Res. C e n te r S. P a c ific 1 9 8 4 ; 5 (2 ): 1 51 - 2 3 3 .
M c C la n a h a n T, C a stilla JC. Fisheries M a n a g e m e n t Progress to w a r d S u s ta in a b lity . 2 0 0 7 ; 3 4 4 p p .
M o o r e G . E n f o rc e m e n t w ith o u t fo rc e : N e w c o n c e p t s in c o m p l i a n c e c o n tr o l fo r f o r e ig n fis h in g o p e r a tio n .
In : Essays in M e m o r y o f je a n C a rro z L a w o f th e Sea. FAO. 1 9 8 7 ; 1 5 9 -1 6 9 .
 A d v a n ta g e and d isa d va ta g e o f th e fish e rie s trad e 423

M SC . M SC W e b s ite : h ttp :// w w w .m s c .o r g / [A c c e s s e d A u g u s t 2 0 0 8 ],

M u ro y a , A rihiro. D e v e lo p m e n t m e c h a n is m o f F ish e rie s in V ie t N a m : D e v e lo p m e n t p r o c e s s o f e x p o rt-o ri­
e n te d fis h e rie s fo c u s in g o n s h rim p c u ltu re . N o irin K in y u , 2 0 0 6 ; (8): 1 6 - 2 7 (in J a p a n e s e ).
O PR T. O P R T W e b s ite : h ttp ://w w w .o p r t.o r .jp /e n g /in d e x .h tm l [A c c e s s e d A u g u s t 2 0 0 8 ],
R igg K, P a rm e n tie r R, C u rrie D. H a ltin g IU U F ish in g : E n fo rc in g In te r n a tio n a l Fisheries A g re e m e n ts . O c e a n a .
2 0 0 3 ; 32 pp.
S a k u m a T . S u rv e y r e p o r t o n s a lm o n a n d tr o u t a q u a c u ltu r e in S o u th e rn C h ile . A s ia -P a c ific R e s o u rc e M ate rial
C e n te r R e s o u rc e M a te ria l. 2 0 0 7 ; 2 5 p p (in J a p a n e s e ).
S a n o M . W o r ld M a rk e ts o f S a lm o n : A g ri-B u s in e s s -O rie n te d A q u a c u ltu r e . S e iz a n d o S h o te n , T okyo. 2 0 0 3 ; 1 -
2 5 9 (in J a p a n e s e ).
S a tria A, M a ts u d a Y. Im p a c t o f d e c e n tr a liz a tio n p o lic y o n c o m m u n ity b a s e d m a n a g e m e n t: a le s s o n fro m th e
c a s e o f w e s t L o m b o k , IIFET 2 0 0 4 J a p a n . 2 0 0 4 .
Takahashii N . E x p o rt le a d in g e c o n o m ic g ro w th a n d its in c o m e a llo c a tio n is su e : A c a s e o f C h ile fro m th e la te
1 9 8 0 s to th e e a rly 2 0 0 0 s . L a tin A m e ric a n R e p o rt 2 0 0 7 ; 23(1 ): 3 4 - 4 3 (in J a p a n e s e ).
T aya K (e d ). S h rim p A q u a c u ltu re in A sia a n d Trade. S e iz a n d o -S h o te n , T okyo. 2 0 0 3 ; 2 0 2 p p (in J a p a n e s e ).
Torii K. T u n a h a n d lin g a t K aiten su sh i b u s in e s s , jo u r n a l o f R e g io n a l Fisheries 2 0 0 6 ; 4 6 (3 ): 1 8 7 - 2 0 0 (in J a p a ­
n e se ).
W illm a n R. A R e v ie w o f Past R e n t S tu d ie s in Fisheries. A n o te p r e p a r e d fo r th e p r o je c t E s tim a tin g C lo b a l R en t
Loss in Fisheries. FAO, R o m e . 2 0 0 6 .
W o rld w a tc h In stitu te . V ital S ig n s 2 0 0 6 . 2 0 0 6 ; 1 2 8 - 1 31 ( J a p a n e s e tra n s la tio n 2 0 0 7 ).
W W F . T u n a fa r m in g in t h e M e d it e r r a n e a n : t h e b lu e f in t u n a s to c k a t s ta k e . 2 0 0 4 . [ O n lin e ] h t t p : / /
w w w .w w f.o r.jp /a c tiv ity /m a rin e /lib /in d e x .h tm [A c c e s s e d A u g u s t 2 0 0 8 ],
Y a m a m o to N. M a rk e tin g s e c to r 's b e h a v io r a lo n g w ith c h a n g e s in tu n a su p p ly , d e m a n d a n d m a rk e t: Im p o rt
tu n a a n d d o m e s tic m a rk e tin g b u s in e s s , jo u r n a l o f R e g io n a l Fisheries 2 0 0 6 ; 4 6 (3 ): 1 71 - 1 8 5 (in J a p a ­
n e se ).
Y a m a o M . R ap id g ro w th o f fish c o n s u m p t i o n m a rk e t in East A sia: G lo b a liz a tio n a n d re g io n a liz a tio n o f
fis h e rie s tr a d e , ja p . j. Fisheries E c o n o m ic s 2 0 0 6 ; 5 1 (2 ): 1 5 - 4 2 (in J a p a n e s e ).