"Trust in Fisheries"

Ladies and Gentlemen

It gives me great pleasure to have the opportunity to be with you here today. To start with I would like to congratulate the organizers of this Forum for bringing about this ever growing seafood conference that is really dealing with international seafood supply and marketing despite the modest label:  North Atlantic Seafood Forum. That of course reflects the fact that no food category is more widely traded internationally than seafood with some 36 percent of all seafood produced globally being traded across national borders (FAO SOFIA 2016).

The issue discussed in this session has from time immemorial been instrumental for survival in my country: Supply and markets for white fish. Through the centuries fish was not only the staple diet for our people but also our main source of foreign currency.

Cod was of such historic importance that once it was suggested that a picture of salted cod be the main national emblem.  Even though cod is depicted on our monetary coins today, cod is no longer the mainstay of our economy the way it was, thanks to the hydroelectric and geothermal energy sectors we have developed and more recently, our rapid rise in the world of international tourism.

Yet, it is clear that fish will for a long time to come be a very important part of our economy. And when I say fish, I mean wild fish despite our efforts to develop aquaculture along the lines of our neighbours. This overriding importance of wild fish, of course, puts the fisheries scene in my country in a special light, for example compared to Norway where the value of aquaculture fish has become significantly higher than that of wild captured fish.  

As for the global figures we have recently reached an important landmark in the supply of fish: More than half of all seafood for human consumption now comes from aquaculture. The FAO predicts that in 8 years' time, i.e. in 2025, some 58% of all fish for human consumption will come from aquaculture and 42% from wild capture fisheries.

The FAO predicts that capture fisheries can indeed provide significantly more fish, given that the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries is applied more widely as well as the Precautionary Approach.

Of course it is great news how successful the aquaculture sector has become in providing the markets with ever more fish. This development underlines what a special food wild fish really is.

In Iceland we have been trying for decades to develop aquaculture. But because of difficult environmental conditions we have mostly seen failures. Yet, I am happy to say that now the prospects do look brighter than ever, not only for large scale salmon and trout aquaculture but also for production of warm water species reared under highly controlled conditions using our ample geothermal water resources. That being said we still face a challenging task of developing the aquaculture industry in harmony with Iceland´s environmental goals, which of course are deeply enriched in our overall fisheries and have been for decades. As the sector expands further, we must consider and ensure that we are continually improving its environmental sustainability. That is not only essential to the long-term economic sustainability of the aquaculture industry, but as well to our food security and ever precious natural heritage.

However, this session deals with wild capture fisheries, not aquaculture. Much of the discussion in this session is how the supply of wild fish is likely to be in the coming years.  

The tarnished image of capture fisheries and the consequences.

Capture fisheries were for decades a star of the global food industry by putting more and more fish on the world´s food table year after year.  Fisheries were developed very fast all over the world and experts debated about the potential maximum the world´s oceans could deliver.  Many believed that there was so much fish in the sea that there was no urgency in establishing effective fisheries management. These, however, were soon proven wrong.   Ever larger and more powerful fishing vessels casting ever larger nets were always ahead of the authorities trying to control the fisheries.  Besides, the management methods that governments eventually put in place proved ineffective. And the outcome was well advertised all over the world:  Overfishing and collapse of fish stocks. Too many vessels chasing too few fish. And the fisheries sector got really bad publicity. All over the world.

 Environmental NGO´s reached out to the public under the banner: “Governments of the world have failed to manage fisheries”. They started a campaign to put things right by establishing environmental labels for fishery products. Consumers would put things right where governments had failed: By only buying products labelled by NGOs through an independent certifier.

So, the ecolabelling movement came around as a result of a breach of trust. And now that trust must be restored.

The ecolabelling movement forced the industry to rethink strategies. Also, governments had to address their ineffectiveness in managing fisheries. And that is what they have been doing and must continue to do.

The good news now is that more and more countries are coming to grips with managing their wild capture fisheries. Most success has come by adopting secure fishing rights, along the lines we have in Iceland which has proved to be an effective way to avoid taking too many fish. In addition, the wider environmental effects of fishing are being tackled effectively by:   

Preventing large scale killing of seabirds, dolphins and seals ; avoiding bycatch and juveniles during the fishing operations; protecting vulnerable marine ecosystems by closing down areas for bottom fishing;  by designing ever better and more energy efficient fishing vessels. This is called the Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (or in short the Ecosystem Approach).

To summarize: The capture fisheries sector made some mistakes. Now it is fast making up for those mistakes.

I wish I could put a full stop here with the conclusion that my story today has a happy ending. But that of course is not the case.

Rebuilding trust

The consequence of this mistrust is that the capture industry is faced with ever more regulations, certifications and labels of all kind in addition to the increased requirements that the food industry in general has to cope with.

It seems to me that the environmental demands are getting out of hand. Industry is complaining that once they have complied with one requirement, two new ones pop up. Be they Catch Documentation Schemes, different ecolabelling schemes demanded by different buyers, all calling for different things, International Plans against Incidental Catch of Seabirds. Plans against IUU fishing etc.etc. Each new scheme demands data and certifications that bear very significant costs. Besides, we have programs to protect Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems, Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction, CITES , the Convention on Biodiversity, Regional Fisheries Management Organizations.

And believe me this is not the full list of Protocols and Conventions.

I want to make clear that most of these are very useful instruments by themselves. But is there no way to shorten and simply these lists? I want to leave that question with you today ladies and gentlemen.

Even if the share of captured fish is decreasing, it will for a long time to come be very important in the world´s food supply with its huge variety. More than 1000 species are listed as utilized for food or feed.  Furthermore, my predecessor, Mr. Johannsson pointed out at this conference last year that we can question whether “wild fish” is so wild after all, and if the word mariculture would not be more appropriate

The logic is simple:  If you do proper fisheries science the fish are counted and measured every year and then a calculation is made to decide on how many fish should be taken that year and which sizes.  Of course this fish is “wild” in the sense that these populations have a full reproductive potential and they do feed themselves.

I am saying this because there is an increasing tendency in the public debate to depict capture fisheries as hunting for wildlife and applying wildlife rhetoric to fish stocks. Overfishing or lack of data about a particular species is criticized in the strongest terms making comparisons with land animals that are in real danger of extinction. I am sure you are aware of how powerful CITES has become, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.  This very important international agreement to prevent trade in truly endangered animal (and plant) species was designed for land based animals such as tigers and elephants.

Now CITES is increasingly directing its attention to listing fish species of various kinds despite the fact that the red flags relating to land animals do not apply to fish populations.

This is disturbing and not the least because unnecessary listing of a few species of aquatic animals can effectively close down important fisheries because of the possibility of a bycatch. Same can be said of the “look alike principle” which in CITES terms means that if say a whitefish species is listed then trade in all species, the products from which look similar, should be banned too. So, we need to look carefully at these issues for wild captured fish.

So, more about trust- or the lack of it.

A few words about the trust between the vessel owners and the crewmembers on the one hand and the fisheries sector and the general public on the other.

First let me say that our fisheries in Iceland are doing very well in general. They pay good salaries and high taxes, even if many think they should pay much more to the government coffers. The companies, at least the larger ones,  show very healthy EBIDTAs. And now we have the strongest cod stock we have had for some 60 years.

But, we have seen fractured or even broken trust between the fishermena and their employers, mainly over pay. A bitter ten week general strike by the fishermen has just ended in Iceland with a negotiated settlement. Everyone can see that a such a disruption in supplies to a demanding market is very damaging. So, we do intend to prevent repetition of this by reforming the negotiating structures.

The second trust structure that needs to be repaired is that between the quota holders and the general public. There is a persistent outcry that the users of the fishery resources are not paying their dues to society. There is bad language used and our hard working heroes of the sea are even stamped as Robber Barons. This must stop. So, we intend to make our market based ITQ system even more transparent so that the division of the wealth from our fisheries becomes more transparent.

Of course, there are no quick fixes when it comes to building trust. This can only be done by doing what we know is best and doing it in the most transparent way possible. Iceland is committed to contributing to the international processes in this regards, both through the UN system and Regional Fisheries Management Organizations.

The time has come, in my view to step back and review the issues. Time for rethinking and rebuilding trust for capture fisheries.

Thank you for your kind attention.