SENAT
Report n° 132 (2008-2009) by M. Marcel-Pierre CLEACH, Senator (for the parliament office for the evaluation of scientific and technological choices)
Disponible au format Acrobat (822 Koctets)
II. ARE THE GLOBAL FISHERIES HEADED FOR COLLAPSE?
The question may seem abrupt or biased. However, when considering the history of fishery development, one confronts almost systematically the issue of the "tragedy of commons". Is non-sustainable fishing an inevitability? Does reason enter the equation only after the onset of a crisis? These questions also lead to a precise, consensual assessment of both the state of the resource and the industry's economic health, so as to better understand the causes and therefore initiate solutions.
A. THE INEVITABLE RISE OF NON-SUSTAINABLE FISHING?
The development of deep-sea fishing in Europe is a centuries-old story that has deeply marked our mentalities and civilization.
The very affirmation of the free-sea principle - and, for the fisheries, of free access to marine resources - is directly linked to the Anglo-Dutch dispute over the exploitation of North Sea herring. It also formed the backdrop for Grotius' Mare Liberum of 1609. Since then, many scientific and historical studies allow us to have a long-term vision of the fisheries' evolution and to recognize the "Copernician revolution" necessary for the implementation of sustainable fishing.
1. From aboriginal fishing to global fishing
In their book Une mer sans poissons ("A sea without fish") 10 ( * ) , Philippe Cury and Yves Miserey very usefully shed light on the present fisheries situation by presenting a history of deep-sea fishing, which is often a history of raids and a race for fish, which the "Anglo-Saxon" NGOs today denounce via the expression "Fishing is not mining". They make particular reference to the scientist Jeremy Jackson who, within the framework of a study carried out by the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (NCEAS) at the University of California, distinguished between three historical periods for fisheries: the aboriginal period, the colonial period and the global period .
The aboriginal period is defined as the period dominated by subsistence fishing in small boasts along the coasts. This period lasted a very long time.
The colonial period began in the European fisheries with the large maritime expeditions financed by a capitalist economy and based upon an ever-more-intensive exploitation of natural resources, particularly new marine resources, the most eminent example being cod. Certain archaeologists date the transition from the aboriginal period to the colonial period based upon the apparition of marine fish as a food staple in the countryside and cities far from the coast, while at the same time continental (inland) resources are being exhausted and water quality is deteriorating. Based upon these criteria and according to James Barnett of the University of York, this second historical period would have begun around the year 1000 AD.
The global period corresponds to the current period and to a complete and often excessive exploitation of all of the world's oceans and resources, at all depths and distances.
More generally speaking, the development of fisheries obeys a universal rule of an intensified exploitation, a diversification of the species exploited and a geographical extension in which the two precedent phenomena are repeated up until the complete exploitation of the oceans, characteristic of the global period defined by Jackson.
2. Herring, cod and cetaceans: examples of raids?
Your rapporteur will here rely on several expositions made by Philippe Cury and Yves Miserey, who shed light on this type of behaviour in several historic fisheries: herring, cod and cetaceans.
a) Herring, the first industrial fishery
Herring fishing surely cannot be completely considered a colonial fishery for Europe, since herrings are a North Sea resource. However, it undoubtedly represents the first industrialized form of fishing.
The profits made by the exploitation of this natural resource allowed for the economic development of the Netherlands and of Denmark and drove England's maritime expansion.
The North Sea's herring schools seemed as miraculous as they did inexhaustible. In 1861, they were the subject of incredible descriptions in Jules Michelet's La Mer ("The Sea"), in which the author evoked the unlimited fertility of herring, the rise of schools so dense and numerous as to resemble upswelling islands...
The processing of these prolific catches provoked the fishery's industrialization. During the 14 th century, the herring fishery is estimated to have employed one million people in the Netherlands.
The herring fishery is also thought to have been at the origin of the fishing trade as a fulltime, year-long profession. This evolution would have been encouraged by the British Parliament's decision in 1808 to subsidize herring fishing in order to encourage its development at other countries' expense. Indeed, the number of herring ships in Scotland rose from 32 in 1790 to 830 in 1835. 11 ( * )
Before the First World War, Scotland, the Netherlands and Norway were catching around one million tonnes of herring per year. However, due to over-exploitation, herring fishing had to be stopped during the 1970s. Today, European scientists recommend a TAC of less than 300,000 tonnes.
b) Cod, the first colonial fishery
Cod fishing on the Grand Banks of Newfoundland constituted the first true colonial fishery. Michelet wrote that "Cod, all by itself, created colonies and founded trading posts and towns". This zone is half the size of France and less than 100 metres deep, on average. It is located at the confluence of the Saint Laurence River, the (cold) Labrador Current and the (warm) Gulf Stream and, during the springtime, constitutes an ideal biotope for cod reproduction. There, cod were so numerous and their schools so dense that it was possible to catch the fish using baskets.
In all likelihood, the Grand Banks were first discovered by Basque and English whalers prior even to the discovery of the Americas. Their exploitation perhaps dates as far back as the beginning of the 15th century (the fishery is mentioned on an Italian world map of 1436). However, the fishing grounds were kept secret. Nevertheless, several historical studies today tend to support this hypothesis. 12 ( * )
Salted or dried, cod made up an essential element of the European diet. Between the 16 th and 18 th centuries, this fish is thought to have accounted for 60% of all fish consumed in Europe. Canadian cod production amounted to some 100,000 tonnes per year.
Cod production rose during the 19 th century to 300,000 tonnes per year and peaked in 1968 at 810,000 tonnes .
Cod fishing was an important political and legal issue. Since 1950, it has been the main reason motivating several nations to extend their marine sovereignty and claim ever-larger exclusive economic zones (EEZ). The reason behind these extensions was to transfer the historic rights of foreign (French and English) fishermen to the nations' own domestic fishermen. Three periods of great tension between Great Britain and Iceland accompanied the latter's extension of its territorial waters from 4 to 12 miles in 1964, then the creation of a 50-mile EEZ in 1972 and its extension to 200 miles in 1975. Likewise, Canada's creation of an EEZ in Newfoundland in 1977 provoked serious tensions, in particular with the fishermen of Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon which led to an international ruling unfavourable to our country. This appropriation directly profited Canada's fishermen because this country accounted for 73% of the global cod catch beginning in 1979. In Newfoundland, it allowed the number of fishermen to increase by 41%, the number of ships by 23% and the cod catch by 27% between the years 1977 and 1981.
What is more, this appropriation was undoubtedly one of the causes of the stock's collapse, rendered official by the fishery's complete closure on 2 July 1992 by Canada's Federal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans. 500 years after the discovery of America, one of the New World's most important natural resources had been exhausted. Since then, the fishery's recovery has remained superficial and sporadic.
The stock's collapse and its inability to recover continue to constitute a scientific enigma. However, a range of causes has been identified, though it remains impossible to measure their exact relative importance.
The underestimation of the fishery's over-exploitation is clearly the most important of these causes . Cod's legendary prolificity incited an exploitation ever at the limits of what the stock could truly sustain. The weakness of the stock had therefore been hidden by the phenomenon of cod's natural concentration in order to reproduce. Even if they were less numerous, their concentrations gave the impression of an abundant population and allowed ever greater catches. It is the spatial analysis of catches rather than the actual volumes caught that could have sounded the alarm.
This intensive fishing led to the stock's collapse, because the fishing effort remained constant even though cod suffered from particularly unfavourable climatic conditions . These two main criteria therefore produced a combined effect.
It is probable that other factors also contributed to the collapse, such as the growth of the seal population, which progressively benefitted from protection.
Following its collapse, the fishery's non-recovery is likely to be explained by the ecosystem's definitive evolution . In a way, cod found itself "downgraded". Too weak and too scarce, it became the prey of other species prospering in its place, though they fail to render the same ecological services. Fisheries such as that of shrimp also developed, profiting from their predator's disappearance.
Most specialists today believe that cod will probably never regain its former dominant position, incapable of developing in an environment that has become too unfavourable to the species.
c) Large cetaceans
The large-cetacean fishery offers an excellent example of the destruction of a natural resource by man beginning with its discovery.
Indeed, from the 12 th century and the beginning of whaling by the Basques up until the implementation of a moratorium on cetacean hunting, the entire Cetacea order has been progressively decimated as each new species has been discovered. The first to be affected was the North Atlantic right whale ( Eubalaena glacialis ), followed by the bowhead whale of the Arctic Ocean ( Balaena mysticetus ), the sperm whale ( Balaena catodon ) and the grey whale ( Eschrichtius robustus ).
In the mid-19 th century, the invention of the explosive harpoon and the development of the process of injecting compressed air (which allowed whalers to float the carcasses of all cetacean species 13 ( * ) ) led to the exhaustion of the stocks in the Northern Hemisphere, forcing whalers to concentrate on the Southern Hemisphere. Whale hunting then became an ever-more-efficient industrial activity. In the 1930s, 320,000 cetaceans (blue whales, humpback whales and fin whales) were slaughtered. Then, from 1947 to 1962, 550,000 cetaceans fell victim to hunting. During this period, the stocks of the larger animals having already been wiped out, whalers targeted almost exclusively the smaller cetaceans; this explains the continued high catch numbers.
The management of cetacean stocks that fell to the International Whaling Commission starting in 1946 was unable to develop on a scientific basis, the quotas being attributed according to a Blue Whale Unit (BWU) equivalency in which one blue whale equalled two fin whales, two and a half humpback whales or six sei whales. Eventually, in order to save the species from extinction, a ban on whale hunting became inevitable (in 1966 for the humpback whale and in 1967 for the blue whale). In 1971, a new management system was adopted, but not respected. Whale hunting finally came to an end due to a lack of resources and profits. The 1982 moratorium on commercial whaling, which came into effect in 1986 and was renewed in 1996, testifies to this state of affairs.
Cetacean hunting is still carried out by certain native communities and, above all, by certain countries such as Iceland and Norway which have resumed the commercial exploitation of the minke whale and Japan which pursues so-called "scientific fishing".
The North Atlantic right whale, the first exploited cetacean, has been protected since 1936. This once abundant species has not been observed near the French coast since the three beachings of 1852. Today, only a relic population remains near Greenland.
3. Ever further, ever deeper
The development of fishing follows a threefold process: the intensified exploitation of the "noble" species, diversification via the development in these same fishing zones of new species of lesser commercial value or abundance, and, finally, the geographical extension and the development of deep-sea fishing flotillas, at which point the same mechanism is repeated.
The development of Peruvian-anchoveta fishing is of particular interest, because it is linked to the collapse of another resource. As is often the case in the history of fisheries, the exhaustion of an initial stock forced a reconversion toward a more distant, deeper stock of (at least in the beginning) lesser commercial value.
This is the case of the Peruvian anchoveta, which owes its development to the collapse in the 1950s of the California sardine stock and which led the Americans to transfer their fishing effort to other small pelagic fish of upwelling systems. Beginning in the mid-1960s, the Peruvian anchoveta became the world's largest fishery, with 12 million tonnes accounting for 20% of the world fish catch.
The signs of over-exploitation and the mechanisms by which the fishing effort is transferred to other stocks are not recent, having been identified as early as the 15 th century. Therefore, it has been possible to draw up a map of the geographical development of overfishing in the North Atlantic during the modern era 14 ( * ) , listing the dates at which the intensification of exploitation did not result in a higher catch .
Beginning in the 1920s , hake were over-exploited in the Irish Sea. Cod were over-exploited in the North Sea beginning in 1920, off the coast of Scotland beginning in 1930 and on all the other banks from the 1950s up until the mid-1960s. Therefore, cod, haddock, hake, herring, plaice and rosefish have all been overfished since 1965 (at the latest) in the entire North Atlantic. We are consequently less surprised by today's difficulties and the collapses that have since occurred.
This mechanism is not only to be explained by stock exhaustion; another possible cause is the near inevitability of overcapacity formation. For instance, in the Moroccan cephalopod fishery, the per-man yield (as measured in kilogrammes) decreased 10 fold between 1965 and 1990 due to an increased fishing effort (a 100-fold increase in the number of fishing hours), while the catch volume stagnated.
B. OVERFISHING AND ENDANGERED STOCKS: A UNANIMOUS WORLDWIDE DIAGNOSIS
The period of fishing's expansion is today over. The reserve of virgin stocks is being exhausted. The intensified fishing of those stocks still under-exploited barely compensates for the decreased production of the over-exploited stocks.
|
Halieutic resources and the human food industry: a global view (source: SOFIA 2006). In 2004, global fish production reached 140.5 million tonnes, according to the FAO. However, this production includes several very different elements, not all of which will be taken into account by your rapporteur : - Caught fish totalled 95 million tonnes , with 9.2 million tonnes for continental (inland) catches and 85.8 million tonnes for the marine catches which will be at the heart of the developments to follow. - Aquaculture represented 45.5 million tonnes, with 27.2 million tonnes from freshwater and 18.3 million tonnes from the sea. Of these resources, 105.6 million tonnes were used for human consumption and 34.8 million tonnes for other uses, in particular animal food (including aquaculture). Therefore, in 2004, the world supply of fish destined for consumption came to 16.6 kg per inhabitant ; this represented the highest level since the collection of such data (1974). Fish consumption was only 9 kg per inhabitant in 1961 . But fish consumption is very unequal, varying according to wealth. The wealthier a person, the more fish he or she consumes (29.7 kg per inhabitant in the industrialized countries), but the less he or she depends on fish as a source of food (7.8% of the animal-protein intake). Of the 104 million tonnes destined for human consumption, only 7 million tonnes were consumed in Africa (8.2 kg per inhabitant). 43% of all aquatic food products destined for human consumption are provided by aquaculture, which appears to represent the new frontier of halieutic resources (this subject will be expounded upon further on in the report). Globally, fish provided more than 2.6 billion people with at least 20% of their animal-protein intake; the average figure came to around 15%. According to official statistics, China is by far the world's number one fish producer, itself providing 47.5 million tonnes . Four large fishing zones produce 68% of the world catch: the Pacific Northwest with 21.6 million tonnes or 25% of the total (sardines, Japanese anchovies, pollock), the Southeast Pacific with 15.4 million tonnes (Peruvian anchoveta, Chilean jack mackerel), the central Western Pacific with 11 million tonnes and the Northeast Atlantic with 9.9 million tonnes. |
1. The continued deterioration of the halieutic stocks
Contrary to certain statements, the fishery crisis and the particularly degraded condition of stocks are both well known in biological terms and are the subject of a wide global consensus .
The crisis is quite real. It is neither a fad nor a hallucination on the part of scientists and environmentalists. Cod have not grouped together beneath the Arctic ice shelf and red tuna are not hiding out in some Mediterranean trench. In many cases, the fish in question has not retreated to more distant waters, but has simply disappeared from the ocean.
Of course, it is always possible to deny the assessment of all scientists from around the world because "they don't know how to fish" or "they conduct their survey where there aren't any fish", etc. Nevertheless, the sector's economic crisis and diminishing catches prove the contrary. If the fish were still there in the same quantity, then we would not be observing stagnating or decreasing catches, collapsing stocks, descents in the food chain, etc.
a) Stagnating or diminishing catches around the world
Since 1950, the marine fish catch has enjoyed spectacular growth, rising from 15 million to 85.4 million tonnes in 2004.
However, since the 1980s, volumes have stagnated despite an increase in the number of fishermen and a greater fishing effort.
It should be pointed out that the FAO has publicly indicated that, considering the importance of the Chinese fisheries and the limits of this country's statistical system, Chinese production should be considered separately. The 2006 SOFIA 15 ( * ) report notes: "However, diverse elements still suggest that the statistics provided for China's halieutic and aquacultural production are too high". In addition, outside China, world fish production (including aquaculture) has stagnated at around 90 million tonnes since the end of the 1980s. All subsequent growth has come from China. It is even probable that the global catch volume has already begun to decline since the end of the 1980s.
A second element reinforces this indication. It seems that the rejection of low-value fish, previously deemed unfit for consumption, is decreasing due to the demand for fish meal or simply their commercialization as human food. While previously this catch remained unrecorded because dumped at sea, it may now be brought into port, thereby lending the impression of catch stability. This newly-retained catch has been estimated at 10 million tonnes between 1994 and 2004 (Kelleher, 2005 and Tacon, 2006).
b) "Fishing down marine food webs" (Pauly et al. 1998)
As has been shown by the great French halieutics specialist Daniel Pauly in a much-cited study, if total catches have not decreased, it is because we are fishing ever farther, ever deeper, ever more species and ever lower in the food chain .
(1) From demersal to pelagic species
Indeed, at the global level, catches of demersal fish 16 ( * ) have stagnated since 1970, a period of nearly 40 years.
Global catches have only risen due to increased fishing pressure on the pelagic species. From 1950 to 1994, the global pelagic catch rose from 10 to 40 million tonnes , to the point that global statistics (not including China) are now directly affected by the production of a single fishery: that of the Peruvian anchoveta . Indeed, this fishery is very sensitive to climatic phenomena and its production has varied over the past decade from 1.7 million tonnes in 1998 to over 10 million tonnes these past few years. Pelagic fish currently represent 50% of the total catch volume, but only 40% of the total catch value. The only exception is that of tuna, the open-sea fishing of which has recently grown; the tuna catch has risen from 0.7 million tonnes in 1950 to 4.5 million tonnes in 1994.
Pelagic species account for the bulk of the very diversified global fish catch. Indeed, in 2004, the ten largest fisheries were: the Peruvian anchoveta (10.7 million tonnes), the Alaska pollock (2.7 million tonnes), the blue whiting (2.4 million tonnes), the skipjack tuna (2.1 million tonnes), the Atlantic herring and Spanish mackerel (2 million tonnes each), the Japanese anchovy and Chilean jack mackerel (1.8 million tonnes each), the capelin (1.6 million tonnes) and the cutlassfish (1.4 million tonnes). Together, they represent 28.5 million tonnes or around 1/3 of the global fish catch.
(2) The geographical expansion of the fishing effort
This evolution is also observable geographically. The date of maximum production has already been reached in all of the world's oceans: 1967 for the Northwest Atlantic, the 1980s in the North Pacific, and the early 1990s in the Mediterranean, South Pacific and Indian Ocean. As compared to this maximum amount, certain zones have already registered a very appreciable decrease in production: by 61% in the Northwest Atlantic and by 33% in the central East Atlantic (FAO 1997).
(3) Toward oceanic and deepwater pelagic species
The fisheries' geographical extension is evident in the exploitation data for the oceanic pelagic species, including tuna. These fisheries have been constantly growing since 1950, rising from under 2 to over 6 million tonnes. Since 1965, there are no longer any virgin or unexploited stocks. In 2004, 30% were still considered developing, while 35% were identified as recovering or senescent.
The fishing of deepwater species has exploded, with the FAO now listing nearly 115 different species. In 1950, less than 20% of this oceanic resource was exploited. From 1975 to 1979, the entire resource fell under exploitation and nearly 40% of these deepwater fisheries were already considered senescent. This pourcentage is now over 50%. Less than 20% are considered to have reached maturity, with the remainder under development. This demonstrates the great fragility of this resource, which very rapidly moves from full exploitation to over-exploitation.
c) The over-exploitation of an increasing number of stocks
This situation is evident in the classification by the FAO of halieutic stocks. The world's 200 fisheries are divided into four separate groups :
- Latent fisheries : low catches; under-exploited fisheries.
- Developing fisheries : rising catches.
- Mature fisheries: the production level fluctuates around a sustainable maximum; fully-exploited stocks.
- Senescent fisheries: a decline in production; over-exploited, exhausted or recovering stocks.
According to this pattern, fishing's historic process of diversification and intensification is entering its final phase. According to this view, there have been no latent fisheries since 1970 and mature or declining fisheries represent more than two thirds of the overall total (FAO, 1997).
25% of stocks evaluated by the FAO are either over-exploited (17%), exhausted (7%) or recovering (1%). 52% are fully exploited. The final quarter consists of those species of little commercial interest.
In 1974, only 50% of fish stocks were fully- or over-exploited (10%). The potential of expansion to new stocks was around 40%.
Today, the stocks of the world's ten most important species in terms of catch volume are all over- or fully-exploited according to the FAO.
In geographical terms, the level of full-exploitation varies greatly. In the central East Atlantic, the West Atlantic, the Northwest Atlantic, the western Indian Ocean and the Pacific Northwest, 69-77% of stocks are fully-exploited.
In the Northeast Atlantic, Southeast Atlantic, Southeast Pacific and Indian Ocean, 46-60% of tuna stocks are over-exploited, exhausted or recovering.
These zones in which the fishing pressure is extreme or excessive are therefore becoming apparent.
d) The question of rejections
All of these statistics ignore the question of rejections. Many fishing ships are insufficiently selective regarding the species targeted; in other words, those species the fishermen plan on bringing back to port and selling because marketable.
These incidental, involuntary catches and these rejections are nevertheless important. They are especially difficult to evaluate, because they are usually thrown back into the sea and therefore are not recorded. They represent a real waste, because these rejected fish are almost always dead .
In its 2003 report 17 ( * ) , the Académie des Sciences estimated that, at the global level, rejections amounted to 16-40 million tonnes, or 20-50% of the world's total sold catch.
This situation varies from fishery to fishery. Industrial fisheries targeting a single species, such as tropical shrimp, seem to be the most destructive, with all other fish being rejected. However, the smaller, more traditional fisheries tend to sell their entire catch.
Likewise, the type of fishery plays an important role. For example, according to this same report, trawling for hake in the Bay of Biscay entails the rejection of half of the total catch, while the same figure for the black-seabream fishery of the Normandy-Brittany Gulf exceeds the two-thirds mark. These estimations can also vary greatly depending on the time of year.
Due to these data, it is highly probable that rejections contribute significantly to global overfishing. That is why most managers seek to limit as much as possible or even ban this practice. However, banning rejections is very problematic. It is not easy to monitor and, above all, it would have important consequences for fishermen by entailing a significant decrease in their income.
However, rejections directly benefit seabirds, which use fishing boats as a nursery. In the North Sea, it has been established that the seabird population has greatly increased for this reason and would appreciably decline if rejections were banned.
C. A POSSIBLE OR A CERTAIN COLLAPSE?
In this context of fish stocks subjected to a level of fishing pressure unprecedented since the beginning of the resource's exploitation - the consequences of which could be serious - a scientific article published in the review Science made considerable waves, as though it had unintentionally crystallized the current climate. Its main author was Boris Worm and it was presented as predicting the disappearance of the world's halieutic resources and the end of fishing for 2048 .
It seems essential to your rapporteur to here address this article and the resulting commentary.
1. Will the halieutic resources collapse? Boris Worm's thesis.
Boris Worm is a researcher in the Biology Department of Dalhousie University in Halifax (Nova Scotia, Canada). Along with numerous co-authors, he published an article entitled "Impacts of Biodiversity Loss on Ocean Ecosystem Services" in Science (Vol. 314, 3 November 2006) .
The very title illustrates the fact that the article's most wave-making argument - namely, the scheduled collapse of all fisheries by the year 2048 - was not, in fact, at the heart of the study.
Instead, Worm et al. were seeking to answer the following question: "What is the role of biodiversity in maintaining the ecosystem services on which a growing human population depends?" For the research team, it amounted to applying terrestrial-based research themes to the oceans, this aspect remaining particularly "enigmatic".
"Ecosystem services include not only food production via fishing, but also - and for various reasons - the maintenance of water and environmental quality."
To carry out their study, the authors analyzed and compared four types of data.
First, they used 32 controlled experiments measuring the effects of variations in marine biodiversity (genetic or species richness) on the primary and secondary production of the oceans and on ecosystem stability. Following this first wave of analyses, they concluded that biodiversity, productivity and stability are closely connected, no matter the ecosystems' trophic levels.
They then compiled long-term data from 12 coastal and estuary ecosystems, as well as from a few other sources. For each ecosystem, they concentrated on 30 to 80 important species. These data confirmed their initial results: in other words, that the richest (most biodiverse) systems are also the most stable and the least susceptible to either collapse or the disappearance of important commercial species. Analyzing data covering the past one thousand years, they demonstrated the collapse rate's very spectacular growth starting in the beginning of the 19 th century. These losses of regional biodiversity have adversely impacted three types of ecosystem services: the number of viable fisheries has decreased by one third, nursery habitats (oyster reefs, seagrass beds, wetlands) have diminished by 66%, and filtering and detoxification functions by 63%. In addition, a vicious cycle sets in, with the destruction of certain environments, diminished water quality, the disappearance of habitat and the collapse of certain species.
The authors also observed an increase in invasive species accompanying a decrease in the original biodiversity. These new species are unable to compensate for the lost biodiversity and ecosystem services.
The long-term examination of these coastal and estuary ecosystems confirmed the first series of data.
A third series of data was examined. The authors analyzed the world catch data from the FAO since 1974 and from 64 very large marine ecosystems (150,000+ square kilometres) from 1950 to 2003. Together, these regions represent 83% of the world's fisheries for the past 50 years.
They observed that the number of collapsed fisheries (with a catch less than or equal to 10% of the highest recorded annual total) had risen to 29% of the world's fisheries. Cumulative collapses since 1950 were estimated at 65%.
Once again, they observed that the richer the ecosystem, the less frequent the collapses. The researchers hypothesized that a rich ecosystem encourages a lower fishing pressure and greater diversification, which in turn helps the weakest stocks recover. Likewise, the volume and interannual variation of catches are correlated with ecosystem richness: the richer the ecosystem, the more stable and productive it is.
All of these findings in favour of rich ecosystems led the authors to consider the impact of protected marine zones (marine reserves, sanctuaries, fishing areas, etc.). They therefore studied data available for 44 marine reserves and 4 large fishing areas. They discovered an average increase in ecosystem richness of around 23%. Most importantly, for those zones surrounding the reserves, they observed a 400% increase in productivity per unit of fishing effort, without, however, observing a significant catch increase (most likely due to management measures).
In conclusion, the authors affirm that there exists a proven link between a) the richness of an ecosystem, its stability and, therefore, its capacity to resist natural variations and exterior aggressions and b) its productivity in terms of ecosystem services provided, fishing included.
The gathered data also shed light on the societal consequences of the continued acceleration of biodiversity degradation , such as has been observed up to now, because this trend, it is argued, will lead to the collapse of all fisheries by 2048 .
Not only does this evolution threaten the capacity of a growing human population to procure its food from the sea, but it will also most likely prevent the marine ecosystems from regaining their initial state.
For the report's authors, there is no dichotomy between the protection of biodiversity and long-term economic development, because these two social goods are, in fact, interdependent. Because it guarantees an ecosystem's resistance and resilience, biodiversity is even acquiring insurance value; it should therefore be valued as such.
Finally, the authors argue that "By restoring marine biodiversity through sustainable fisheries management, pollution control, maintenance of essential habitats, and the creation of marine reserves, we can invest in the productivity and reliability of the goods and services that the ocean provides to humanity. Our analyses suggest that business as usual would foreshadow serious threats to global food security, coastal water quality, and ecosystem stability, affecting current and future generations ".
Despite this rather gloomy tableau, the authors believe that the strength of the established connections also allows them to affirm that, at this point, the highlighted trends (an exponential link between the acceleration of biodiversity degradation and the reduction of environmental services) are still reversible if adequate management measures are implemented .
2. The scientific debate
The above dire forecast - the collapse of all fisheries by 2048 - was often all that was retained from the article; this was most likely not the authors' intention.
Scientific and technical critiques of the article have essentially concentrated on two aspects of this forecast: its truthfulness and the notion of a fishery collapsing. Other less important criticisms have also been made.
The American distributor of Science was able to present the article as a direct accusation of the government administration in charge of American halieutic resources: the National Marine Fisheries Service of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA). The administration responded that catches are a poor indicator of fish abundance and the real state of a given stock, because low catches can just as easily be explained by an unhealthy ecosystem as by low prices or restrictive management measures. The American administration points, in particular, to the example of the Georges Bank haddock fishery, whose highest catch level dates from 1965 (150,362 tonnes), as compared to only 12,576 tonnes in 2003 (just over 8% of the maximum 1965 catch). According to the criteria set by Worm et al., this stock would have collapsed; however, in 2003, the fishery's spawning biomass reached 91% of the 1965 figure. Therefore, the administration concludes that Worm et al, by relying on the least common denominator, produced only a rough approximation of the world's stocks and should have attempted to correct this imprecision.
Considering the overall situation of those stocks monitored by NOAA, they remark a slight improvement (decrease) of 2% in the number of overfished stocks between 2003 and 2004 and point out that, at this rate, there will be no overfished stocks in waters under American jurisdiction by 2018. However, this positive evolution should come about even sooner, because the Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) requires that all overfishing come to an end by 2010 among the 532 stocks managed by the federal government.
A more fundamental criticism was undoubtedly that put forward by Michael J. Wilberg and Thomas J. Miller ( Science , Vol. 316, 1 June 2007), who argued that the prediction made by Worm et al. was more the result of statistical chance linked to the analysis's point of departure than any analytical reality, due to the team's chosen definition of "over-exploitation", which they based upon the fishery's historic maximum catch. However, this historic maximum is hardly an attainable or desirable goal with regard to the fishery's sustainable management; on the contrary, it is often preferable to distance oneself from this maximum catch.
Other authors, such as John C. Briggs of the University of Oregon, have challenged the article's concept of "biodiversity", arguing that, rather, it amounted to a decrease in the population of the species under consideration, thereby rendering them unsuitable to fishing due to their low numbers. What is more, Briggs argues that species rarely disappear in the marine environment and he even points out the potential positive impact of so-called "invasive species".
Worm et al. have responded to these criticisms, in particular regarding the scientific value of using commercialized-catch statistics. With regard to the Georges Bank haddock example, they pointed out that this fishery had been the victim of a double collapse. The first occurred in the 1960s and was successfully countered by the setting up of a 200-mile EEZ in 1977. The second collapse took place in the 1980s, due to a too great national fishing effort and could only be countered by the emergency closure of half of the fishery in 1994. In both cases, these protective measures allowed for an increase in the fishery's biomass in 1 to 6 years time, thereby demonstrating the interest of large-scale reserves. Under these circumstances and with regard to catches (-90%), the stock was exhausted from 1970 to 1977 and from 1983 to 2003. With regard to biomass, it was exhausted from 1970 and 1977 and from 1982 to 1997. What is more, the National Marine Fisheries Service considered it overfished from 1967 to 2002 and in 2004. Therefore, it is evident that the catch-rate criterion while less precise, remains valid for judging the overall state of a given stock.
Worm et al. also pointed out that the prospect of a global collapse was not simply a statistical result. There is no cause-and-effect link between the date of the point of departure and the probability of a collapse; indeed, it is rather the opposite that is true.
With regard to population vs. biodiversity, Worm et al. do not accept the distinction, for, they argue, the two are inseparable. While extinctions are rare in the ocean at the global level, they are frequent at the local level. Likewise, the ecosystem consequences of local population losses or disappearances come into effect long before the species' global extinction and can prove irreversible.
Other critiques have concentrated on the article's choice of data with regard to marine reserves (Hölker et al), pointing out a prevalence - and therefore a bias - for tropical zones. For Worm et al., this criticism is not wholly justified, for temperate zones represent 40% of the study sample and, above all, they demonstrate the same trends; in other words, a recovery of biodiversity, even if temporal variability diminishes in tropical waters and the fishing-effort yield shows a greater increase in temperate waters. In any case, Worm et al. deny having wanted to present these data as a panacea . On the contrary, they believe that they constitute useful reference points and in no way exclude wider management measures for the restoration of marine environments and populations.
Finally and more generally, they rejected those critiques that would seek to ban all forecasts based upon past data. In any case, Worm et al. argue that they were not seeking to produce a certain forecast, but simply to consider what the consequences would be were the trend to continue.
For them, this questioning is all the more pertinent given the fact that it has been proven that marine environments and fisheries evolve in a gradual manner that is difficult to observe, even though abrupt and irreversible regime changes can occur, allowing for the establishment of a different type of ecosystem.
D. AN ECONOMIC SECTOR IN CRISIS
In a recent report published in 2008 and entitled "The Sunken Billions. The Economic Justification for Fisheries Reform" 18 ( * ) , the World Bank paints a particularly bleak picture of the global fishing sector. The report's authors were Rolf Willmann of the FAO's Fisheries and Aquaculture Department and Kieran Kelleher of the World Bank's Agriculture and Rural Development Department. It received the backing of the Agence Française de Développement ("French Development Agency" or AFD), as well as the scientific approval of such reputable figures in this domain as Rebecca Lent (NOAA), Serge Garcia (FAO) and Carl-Christian Schmidt (OECD).
This document, which your rapporteur will rely upon in the exposition that follows, underlines the loss of $51 billion per year as a result of poor fishery management .
Above all, it sheds light on the sector's long-standing, poor structural health, a weakness that has only exacerbated the rise in fuel costs. However, this must not hide the reality and seriousness of the problem, or exacerbate it even further.
1. A greatly deteriorated economic performance
The fisheries' economic performance is determined by catch quantity, the price of the fish, the costs of fishing and overall productivity.
In 2004 , the base year for the World Bank report, the nominal value of fish production was $148 billion, including $85 billion for wild fisheries and $63 billion for aquaculture.
Globally, fish prices have changed little in real terms since the late 1980s , in particular due to the rising market share of low-price species, which more than compensates for the rising prices of the most sought-after and increasingly rare species.
In the world market, the rise in demand is concentrated in the developing countries, which are seeing both their standard of living rise and their population grow. For example, in China, fish and seafood consumption doubled between 1998 and 2005 in low-income households and grew by 250% in high-income households. Similarly, demand continues to grow in the United States, favouring long-term growth in the real price for fresh fish.
In terms of costs , hardly any global data are available. However, the report proposes the following distribution, which provides useful references that vary depending on the fishery:
- Work: 30-50%
- Fuel: 10-25%
- Maintenance: 5-10%
- Amortization, remuneration of capital: 5-25%.
In general, fisheries are very dependent on oil prices . Indeed, ½ tonne of oil is required to catch 1 tonne of fish . For example, for an average price of $918 per tonne of fish, $282 (31% of the total value) was spent on fuel. This demonstrates the impact of a doubling of fuel prices on the sector's profitability.
One of the most commonly implemented solutions to counter this problem is increasing productivity via the incorporation of technological advances. For example, seiners in the Indian Ocean are today capable of catching three times more fish than in the mid-1980s. However, without a reduction of the fishing fleat, this race toward productivity is a race toward overcapacity and will lead to just as rapid a decrease in profitability.
a) An increased number of fishermen
In addition, for the past 30 years, the number of fishermen and aquaculturalists has risen more rapidly than the world population . In 2004, there were 41 million fishermen and aquaculturalists (part- and full-time), including 13 million in China, and around 123 million industry-wide jobs, for a production (fishing)-to-job ratio of around 1:3 . Fishermen and aquaculturalists represent 3.1% of the agricultural workforce.
This increase in the number of maritime workers at the world level is due to the developing countries, because the opposite trend is observed in the developed countries . The large fishing countries of the Northern Hemisphere have seen a significant drop in their number of fishermen. Between 1970 and 2004, their number fell by 58% in Japan and by 54% in Norway. In 2004, the world's industrialized countries numbered 1 million fishermen, or 18% less than in 1990. The average age of fishermen in these countries is rising rapidly; this trend is especially evident in Japan, 47% of whose fishermen are older than 60. In the poorer countries, fishing - which serves as a free and accessible job source - is actually a poverty trap and a last-minute means of subsistence . In Asia, this growth has been the strongest (300%), as much in fishing as in aquaculture.
However, due to stagnating catches for the past 20 years, the average catch weight per fisherman fell by 42% between 1970 and 2000, falling from over 5 annual tonnes to only 3.1 tonnes .
This situation perhaps explains the fact that the number of full-time fishermen is decreasing, while that of part-time fishermen is increasing . Indeed, in many zones, fishing is a seasonal activity that sometimes lasts only a few dozen days each year, though without proving very profitable for all that (thereby necessitating more than one source of income).
b) An increase in the fishing effort
The fishing effort has also greatly increased, placing even more pressure on the resource. This effort is a combination of the number of boats, their size, and the power of their motors, as well as of their fishing devices .
Over the past thirty years, the number of fishing boats has increased by 75% to over 4 million vessels , including both decked and non-decked boats (1.3 and 2.7 million, respectively). Above all, the number of motorized, decked boats has more than doubled. 86% of decked ships are to be found in Asia, while Europe accounts for less than 8% of the total.
As no more precise data exist on ship tonnage and power, it is difficult to draw too many conclusions from these figures.
Nevertheless, it is evident that the fishing fleet has grown not only numerically, but also in terms of its catch capacity. The most common coefficient put forward is around 4.2% per year (Fitzpatrick, 1996) , due to technological advances.
However, similar to fishermen's per capita productivity , shipping-vessel productivity is falling rapidly , due to the upper catch limit having already been reached; indeed, per-vessel productivity has decreased 6 fold on average since 1970 . This is essentially due to the formation of overcapacities. Despite the identification of this phenomenon, fleet-reduction measures most often affect the most run-down and the least productive vessels, thereby failing to reduce the overall fishing effort.
Under these conditions and to maintain its profitability, the world fleet places pressure on the salaries of its sailors and continues its race to integrate technological advances. In addition, while fishing regulations set a limit to the number of days at sea, they fail to address the root of the problem: overcapacity.
What is more, considering these important trends, the authorities have reacted by mitigating the downward pressure on salaries by implementing various relief measures and subsidies, just as they helped reduce the cost of fuel, facilitated modernization, and maintained elevated fish prices; however, all of these measures run counter to a more sustainable and profitable management of the fisheries.
Indeed, the World Bank argues that numerous subsidies attributed to the fishing sector are pernicious, because they exacerbate overcapacities and over-exploitation. Fundamentally speaking, they diminish or even eliminate all those market mechanisms that would otherwise allow this trend to be stopped.
Fuel-related subsidies typically seek to reduce the cost of fishing; however, by so doing, they create an incentive to continue fishing even though catches are falling and prices - and, therefore, demand - do not allow for a continuation under such economic conditions. The results are over-fishing, overcapacities, a reduction of economic efficiency, and the dissipation of financial resources.
Therefore, the World Bank has drawn up an imperfect-yet-clear, synthetic inventory of fishing-sector subsidies for the year 2000:
Estimation of fishing-sector subsidies having a direct impact on the fishing effort (in millions of dollars per year) 19 ( * ) :
|
Subsidies |
Developing countries |
Developed countries |
Total |
% |
|
Fuel |
1.3 |
5.08 |
6.4 |
63.5% |
|
Purchase of catch surpluses |
- |
0.03 |
0.03 |
0.3% |
|
Construction and modernization of the fleet |
0.6 |
1.3 |
1.9 |
18.9% |
|
Tax exemptions |
0.4 |
0.34 |
0.7 |
7.3% |
|
Fishing agreements |
- |
1 |
1 |
9.9% |
|
Total |
2.3 |
7.75 |
10.05 |
100% |
Therefore, some $10 billion is estimated to be spent each year on fishing-sector subsidies, unfortunately too often contributing to the vicious cycle of over-exploitation.
c) The bias in favour of capital intensity: the example of Brittany
In its 2003 report 20 ( * ) , the Académie des Sciences emphasizes, among the negative impacts of government subsidies on the management of halieutic resources, that of maintaining or increasing over-capacities by introducing a bias in favour of augmenting the capital intensity of the fishing sector in Brittany in the 1980s.
During this period, government aid for the purchase of new or used vessels clearly favoured the larger boats (16-25 metres) for which such subsidies were almost systematic and reached the highest percentages (21-22%), as compared to a frequency of 27-43% for ships under 10 metres and an average rate of 11-13%.
However, the report argues that a strong link exists between the crisis of the small-scale fishing industry in the 1990s and this subsidy policy of the 1980s.
What is more, the justifications habitually put forward seem ill-founded in the case of fishing.
The argument that fishing represents a heavy, "traditional" industry is hardly convincing, for subsidies introduce a bias and systematic government aid to capital-intensive economic activities is hardly sustainable.
The second argument commonly put forward concentrates on the jobs engendered by the fishing sector in fishing-dependent zones without any other alternatives. Once again, studies would tend to undermine this argument. Fishing jobs never represent more than 4% of all jobs in the most fishing-dependent zone (Quimper) and 2-3% in the three following zones (Les Sables d'Olonne, Fécamp and Boulogne). Taking into account the entire industry, all fishing-related jobs never exceed 10% of the total; indeed, as your rapporteur has already pointed out, such jobs are often independent of the local - and even French - fishing sector. In addition, fishing jobs always represent less than 3.3% of added value for the four concerned zones, with the entire sector accounting for less than 5.3%.
The third and final argument concerns our competitiveness with regard to heavily-subsidized, foreign fisheries. While this argument seems to be the most economically justified, it also sheds light on the general imbalance of a system lacking coordination and an overall vision.
2. The billions swallowed up by fishing
Several studies preceding the World Bank report tend to confirm the 2008 results.
An initial study carried out by the FAO in 1992 estimated the loss in revenue at $54 billion per year (base year: 1989), for a global fisheries revenue of $70 billion.
In a second report published in 1997 and building upon the previous 1992 study, Garcia and Newton confirmed the earlier study's conclusions and estimated that economically efficient fisheries should lead to a 43% decrease in the cost of fishing, a 71% increase in the price of fish, or a 25-50% decrease in catch capacity.
In its report, the World Bank sought to calculate the amount of potential savings if global catches were well managed . The results are striking.
a) $51 billion of potential savings for the global fishing industry
The report estimates the loss of revenue at around $51 billion , knowing that this figure lies between $37 billion and $67 billion and with an 80% confidence rate in its estimation, while the global fishing product is estimated at around $85 billion .
Therefore, the World Bank estimates the loss in wealth from 1974 to 2004 at $2.2 trillion.
For the World Bank, these estimations, while considerable, remain prudent and conservative, because all negative costs have not been taken into consideration (natural capital, environmental services, biodiversity and tourist appeal, not to mention illegal fishing and their overall impact on the sector, as well as the cost in terms of the greenhouse effect, etc.). What is more, two earlier studies had estimated the loss in revenue at $80 to 90 billion, an amount equal to the total fishing product (Sanchirico and Wilen 2002, Wilen 2005).
Globally, the annual loss is therefore equivalent to 64% of the total commercialized catch and 71% of the total fish value traded at the international level.
The principal weakness of this assessment could be its global, aggregated nature. However, once again, several case studies confirm the validity of this evaluation. For example, one study estimates the economic potential represented by the recovery of 17 overfished stocks in the United States at $567 million or three times more than these fisheries' current revenue (Sumaila and Suatoni, 2006).
Even in several zones whose fisheries are reputed to be managed in an exemplary manner, the potential gains could, in exceptional cases, be spectacular. They are estimated at 55% for the Icelandic cod and 29% for the Peruvian anchoveta.
In this country - whose example your rapporteur will revisit later in greater detail - potential savings are estimated at $228 million per year. This is to be explained by the enormous overcapacity of the fleet, which is some 250-350% larger than would be necessary to carry out a sustainable form of fishing (MSY quota), while that of the fish-meal factories is similarly estimated at 300-400% the useful capacity. For this reason, the fishing season has been reduced by 60 days per year.
This situation becomes all the more detrimental the more countries are dependent on fishing, both economically (the share of national wealth, the share of exports, a source of currency, etc.) and socially (jobs, food production, the social fabric).
b) Fishing in the English Channel from 1996 to 1997: a model of overcapacity
Even before these results, which - as your rapporteur has already pointed out - are a prolongation of other studies, the Académie des Sciences, in its 2003 report 21 ( * ) , wanted to consider the example of the French fisheries in the English Channel, in order to lend greater substance to evaluations that are necessarily too general in nature.
Rather than pointing the finger at French fishermen, for the other fisheries were confronted with the same issues, the Académie wanted to demonstrate the impact of overcapacities on fishing profitability by attempting to model the profile of the French fleet in the English Channel if the objective were maximizing profits rather than maintaining jobs .
In the base situation - in other words, for the 1996-1997 season - the net result was very low: less than 3% of the commercialized value for 1,674 boats and 4,840 fishermen.
Applying the net-result maximization model would allow for an increase of 760% and €46 million in value, despite a €25 million fall in the value of the commercialized catch.
But such an evolution would be costly in terms of the number of boats: -526 (around 1/3 of the fleet) and jobs: -2,000. According to the same model, the cost of maintaining these excess jobs would then amount to €23,300 per year.
This model did not take into account the side-effects on jobs; however, the Académie des Sciences emphasized the extent to which - not only in this sector, but in France, in general - a large portion of the "post-production" industry is actually independent of the catch, relying as it does on imported products destined for France or for re-exportation.
Your rapporteur does not believe that these figures, which are already dated and the result of a theoretical model, should be interpreted as a recommendation. However, they do perfectly illustrate the fragility of an economic sector in a situation of overcapacity and the interest of reducing this same overcapacity, as much in the interest of the halieutic stocks as the public coffers and the fishermen themselves. They also shed full light on the political choice of maintaining fishing jobs at an elevated cost.
***
"Catastrophic and inacceptable": such an assessment remains masked by a few fisheries in good health and, above all, by a system whereby profits are privatized and visible, while losses are socialized and hidden.
The policies carried out with short-term goals have too often acted as mere bandages or expedients and, in the long run, have acted to exacerbate the problem; what is more, they have created an economic and social dependency on government subsidies.
In this regard, it would be preferable for the national accounts to be able to take into consideration the positive and negative impacts of the deterioration or improvement of halieutic stocks on the country's national wealth. It would be better to point out the socially counter-productive or, on the contrary, constructive nature of certain policies.
It would seem only sensible to invest the money currently wasted at the world level on a deep-seated reform, the transition toward sustainable fishing and science.
This reform of the fishing industry could be based upon three main lines:
- The stocks' intergenerational sustainability.
- The fisheries' economic profitability.
- Fairness, taking into consideration the social aspects of these changes and the equilibrium of both the industry and the regions.
Because any such reform must be the result of a shared diagnosis, it seemed essential to your rapporteur to more widely distribute these data which are the subject of a wide scientific consensus, among both economists and halieutics specialists.
In this respect, and contrary to what is too often argued by the opposing "friends of the fishermen" and "friends of the fish", the Johannesburg goal - in other words, returning stocks to their Maximum Sustainable Yield by 2015 - cannot be the only objective. Such an objective is much too "halieutics-centric" and, what is more, species-by-species. It is necessary to develop a wider, economic and social vision which seeks to organize economically- and socially-profitable fisheries and, fundamentally, to consider the best way in which to exploit the halieutic resources.
* 10 Une mer sans poissons, Philippe Cury and Yves Miserey, Calman Levy, Paris, 2008, 283 pages .
* 11 Michael Wigan, The last of the Hunter Gatherers .
* 12 Mark Kurlansky, Cod: A Biography of the Fish that Changed the World .
* 13 Certain species, such as the blue whale, sink when dead.
* 14 Troadec 1976, Académie des Sciences 2003.
* 15 The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture.
* 16 Species living and feeding on or near the bottom of the ocean.
* 17 Alberson et al., 1994.
* 18 The World Bank, Washington, DC (USA), 2008, 80 pages.
* 19 Ibid. and Milazzo 1998, Sumaila and Pauly 2006, Sharp and Sumaila 2007.
* 20 Ibid. p. 42 sqq., Hénaff et al. 1995, Parrès 1997.
* 21 Ibid. p. 36 sqq.