- How has the fishing situation in Brazil been evolving from a sustainability perspective? Is the situation worsening, or is there some progress towards more sustainable production? In this regard, how does Brazil compare to the rest of the world? (Do you prefer to talk only about marine fishing or fishing in general?)
Beyond the distinction between marine and freshwater fishing, it is important to highlight the distinction between fishing production itself and aquaculture. The focus of the Unimonte Responsible Seafood Consumption Guide is limited to species originating from marine (wild) fishing, but for some topics, I would like to further discuss aquaculture, as it is on the agenda of the Brazilian Alliance for Sustainable Fisheries.
Globally, marine fish stocks have been under increasing pressure in recent decades, and the most recent data published by the FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), based on stock assessment data, indicate that more than 30% of fish stocks are overfished, meaning they are being exploited beyond biologically sustainable levels.
http://www.fao.org/3/a-i5555e.pdf
Although some researchers paint a disheartening and even “grim” future for fisheries, with a total collapse before 2050, others predict a more promising future, IF, AND ONLY IF, adequate management and conservation measures are implemented.
https://www.oceanprosperityroadmap.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Synthesis-Report-6.14.15.pdf
Some recently announced global commitments, such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), are favorable to improving fishing conditions worldwide, as for the first time, there is a specific set of ocean-focused goals (Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development), which should guide governmental actions, international agencies, civil society and other institutions over the next 15 years (2016-2030).
For Brazil, information is harder to obtain and synthesis works are already outdated. There has been no organized and official data on fish landings in the country since 2011. The Ministry of Fisheries was created in 2003 and abolished in October 2015. During this period, seven different ministers passed through the portfolio, the vast majority without any technical knowledge of the subject. Some advances, such as the Shared Management system for Fishery Resources (MMA and MPA) and the creation and maintenance of Permanent Committees for Management and Sustainable Use, with their scientific subcommittees, need to be maintained, but political instability and the fragility of control and management mechanisms generate much uncertainty and distrust in the sector.
We have a list of endangered aquatic fish and invertebrate species, generated by serious and methodologically based work by renowned Brazilian researchers and international organizations, which, coupled with a Ministerial Ordinance (MMA nº 445/2014), is currently suspended. Without the effects of the Ordinance, which proposes to fully protect endangered species through measures restricting their capture, transport, custody, storage, handling, processing, and commercialization, these species remain without legal protection in the country.
In addition to conservation concerns, the protection of fishery resources and the maintenance of stocks are closely linked to issues of food security and job creation. Scientific data supports that approximately 60% of seafood landed for human consumption worldwide comes from small-scale fisheries, which employ about 12 million workers.
In Brazil, artisanal fishermen and women have gradually gained space in discussions, qualifying their discourse and empowering their leadership, through social movements, events and campaigns, such as the National Campaign for the Regularization of the Territory of Traditional Fishing Communities. Some international NGOs, such as OCEANA and RARE, recently started their actions in Brazil, through the Vibrant Oceans initiative, which also generated reports on investments in industrial and small-scale fisheries in Brazil.
The “Voluntary Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries in the Context of Food Security and Poverty Eradication,” published by FAO in 2015, has already been translated and was the subject of a training seminar in Brazil in June 2016, organized by the Ouvidoria do Mar.
- What are the reasons for this?
Partially answered previously, I would quote a very recent statement by Mônica Brick Peres, director of OCEANA in Brazil:
“The lack of information hinders the development of efficient public policies. This causes most fisheries in Brazil to have their target resources overfished, jeopardizing the activity. It is necessary to overcome this situation.”
- Oceans are less studied and known than terrestrial ecosystems. Would this be one of the reasons? (See the edition we published on oceans a few years ago here: http://pagina22.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/Pagina22_Ed79.pdf)
The Unimonte Responsible Seafood Consumption Guide, in its first version from 2008, was cited in the edition.
Part of the lack of knowledge about oceans, from a research perspective, lies in the high costs of deep-sea collection operations. Approximately 90% of the ocean floor is more than 3,000 meters deep. But 90% of global fishing is carried out in coastal waters, where primary productivity is higher. In deep waters, fishing may not be profitable enough to maintain a fleet. That's why boats with gigantic and endless nets sweep oceanic areas. Fisheries need scale to be profitable in these regions.
But the exploration of mineral resources is very profitable in deep waters, and therein lies a great threat. Oil accidents, such as the one in the Gulf of Mexico, generate very large impacts on the fauna of deep areas, and we cannot measure this impact because we don't even know what exists in these regions, much less if there are species suitable for fishing exploitation. Vessel traffic and exploration techniques can also pose threats to living resources. In these cases, particularly in Brazil, the scientific community benefits from environmental legislation that requires companies to maintain survey and monitoring programs, and contingency plans, which demand data collection. These resources have structured networks for collecting fishery data throughout the country, in addition to monitoring strandings along the entire Brazilian coast.
- In your opinion, what is the best way to address this problem?
There are numerous ways to address this problem, and I believe that the many segments, working together on some issues and separately on others, can have a significant impact on changing this scenario.
In the specific case of responsible consumption, we intend to work specifically on consumer education. To inform them about what they should and should not buy and consume (at home or away from home) and why they should do so. To this end, we can approach them directly, or work with all other links in the production process that have the consumer at the end of the chain. Thus, we try to bring to the Brazilian Alliance for Sustainable Fisheries from artisanal fishermen to the largest food service company in the world.
- What is the role of the State and producers?
It should be a commitment of the State to collect and analyze fishery landing data, direct resources, and demand stock assessments of interest to the country, which would result in control and management measures. But as already stated, this role is far from being fulfilled.
Producers, if they had information and a long-term culture, would seek to organize themselves and demand the fulfillment of the State's role, and at the very least, would create self-regulatory strategies for the sector. But that is not part of Brazilian culture. The immediacy and the maxim of "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" prevail....
It seems to me (but I am not an expert nor have I ever studied this subject) that São Paulo aquaculturists have followed this path.
- How can consumers contribute?
The consumer's role would be to demand commitment from their suppliers, whether they are the fishmonger at the market, the large supermarket, or the restaurant owner, that they only offer fish that are not at risk from the perspective of fish stocks. This is the ideal scenario, where all consumers have access to information and use it consciously, thus creating a demand reduction effect, which ultimately implies a decrease in capture. But we have a long way to go to reach this level. In the meantime, consumers could start to be interested in knowing the "history of the fish." We would like them to be interested in knowing "who" that fish is, where it was caught, how it was caught, if it is at risk, if it poses any health risk, etc.
- For the consumer to contribute, they must first be well-informed, right? Is there enough information? Are campaigns necessary? What is the role of communication vehicles?
Exactly as I mentioned above. After some years of working directly with consumers, we concluded that we should act on multiple fronts. If we work with large retailers, limiting the supply of unsustainable fish at the source, the consumer's choice will be made from a smaller universe of options, which facilitates communication. Campaigns or printed or digital material, by themselves, do not have much effect if there is no public figure "advocating the cause." Worldwide, the logical option has been prominent chefs who have now conquered the mainstream media and are influential figures for the common public, or those who host TV shows that address gastronomy. Here in São Paulo, we have already made some partnerships with C5 (Câmara Cascudo Culinary Culture Center) and Slow Fish – Slow Food Brazil. We are expanding the proposal, and chef Alex Atala was at the Monterey Bay Aquarium's Sustainable Foods Institute, where he formalized the commitment of his restaurants D.O.M and Dalva & Dito to Seafood Watch.
Through a partnership between ANIMA and Seafood Watch, we plan to create a brand that will become a reference in the country for consumption recommendations. At this stage, communication vehicles will play an immense role, as the issue of reference is very important for the success of awareness-raising.
- How can we raise awareness about responsible consumption? Should this awareness also be addressed to producers?
We intend to work in partnership in various ways, and based on the very origin of Seafood Watch, which was born at the Monterey Bay Aquarium, we intend to work strongly with aquariums. We have already brought together the Ubatuba Aquarium and the recently inaugurated AquaRio in the Brazilian Alliance for Sustainable Fisheries. In Monterey, a specific area simulates a cafe, where visitors select their dishes from a virtual menu and renowned chefs serve "customers" through recorded videos, providing information about the selected fish.
The distribution of printed guides in these high-traffic locations would ensure significant reach. Furthermore, the educational programs planned in these aquariums, which receive many schools of various levels, offer us space to raise awareness among children and young people, who can change consumer mentality in future generations.
On the part of producers, awareness should be even more profound, as it would ensure the maintenance of their "livelihood" in the medium and long term. But as I said before, often immediacy and greed when observing the abundance of the resource speak louder. We still have to work to correct many distortions, but generally speaking, artisanal, traditional fishermen, who have involved their families in the activity for many generations, are more aware of sustainability than large industrial shipowners, who, in theory, have more access to information.
- Where can the Responsible Seafood Consumption Guide be found? Is it available digitally?
The 2014 version of the Unimonte Responsible Seafood Consumption Guide was developed in the context of the Amigo Fisherman Project, executed by the NGO Biopesca Project in partnership with Unimonte. At the time, in addition to the printed guide, biological fact sheets were prepared for each of the indicated species, with data on life cycle, occurrence, popular names, and photos of the animals, among others. The activities of the Amigo Fisherman Project were sponsored for two years by the Petrobras Socio-environmental Program and ended in August 2015. Thus, the page maintained by the project with the interactive and digital version of the guide (http://guiadeconsumodepescados.eco.br) was taken down.
However, the pocket-sized printable version remains available for download on the Unimonte Portal, at http://www.unimonte.br/sustentabilidade/o-jeito-sustentavel-de-ser-da-unimonte-16
- A recently broadcast TV report showed that consumers don't even know what species of fish they are taking home. What evolution exists in the development and dissemination of origin certificates?
The study “Survey and characterization of fish trade in the cities of Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo” was carried out between April and May 2014 by SOS Mata Atlântica. It pointed out many instances of fish labeling fraud. It is very difficult for consumers, even if informed and conscious, to distinguish one fish steak from another of similar species. But this is not a uniquely Brazilian situation; it is a widespread practice worldwide. An Oceana report from 2013 in the USA shows high rates of seafood identification fraud.
The Ministry of Environment, through the IBAMA's fisheries resources coordination, has been trying to operationalize the Fish Origin Document (DOP) since 2008, an electronic system that aims to prevent or deter illegal fishing in fishery production chains through the monitoring and control of fish transport and commercialization. However, like all federal processes currently, this is yet another project moving at a very slow pace.
We have some good private initiatives that develop techniques for DNA-level identification of plant and animal products. In the specific case of fish, Myleus Biotecnologia does important work with some governmental agencies to combat these frauds. It also works on developing origin certification seals for fish, especially salmon.
Regarding traceability in the seafood chain, we are still far behind what can be observed abroad. Certification is a topic that would fill many pages, and I still need a lot of study to speak fluently about it, but one of the premises of certification is the guarantee of product traceability. In the case of fishing, the only initiative I know of is the one developed within the scope of the Sustainable Fishing Project by Conservation International, one of the winners of the Google Social Impact Challenge 2014. A partnership with This Fish, a Canadian company, has allowed mangrove crabs caught and marketed by the project to be traced from their origin to the consumer, through a QR Code.
- How can consumption be directed towards abundant species and restricted for at-risk species?
There are many strategies, but we will focus on the sustainability commitments of large retailers and on consumer information, through events and opinion leaders.
We also want to work on a publication of recipes by renowned chefs that promote some abundant but undervalued and unrecognized species.
- On November 1, Governor Geraldo Alckmin signed a decree which, according to him, simplifies procedures for São Paulo's fish farming and aquaculture and streamlines the rules for obtaining environmental licenses in the State. What is your assessment of this decree and what are the environmental risks that this "streamlining" brings?
I don't feel comfortable answering on this topic, although through our partnership with Seafood Watch we intend to work with recommendations for farmed tilapia and pirarucu.
I haven't followed the process and am not familiar with the sustainability indicators considered in the licensing processes.
- What is the history of this decree? Did it stem from any pressure from producers?
I also don't know the answer, but I have some indications.
Governor Geraldo Alckmin's father was a veterinarian and was director of the Fishing Institute. I've heard this from the governor himself at some events. The current director of the Fishing Institute is directly involved with the state's producers, as he is a researcher in the field of tilapia farming.
On the Peixe BR website, the news is clearly presented as a “victory for the São Paulo fish farming chain.”
But I don't think it's bad, as these same producers and the Fishing Institute have been working for years on a joint project by SEBRAE and INMETRO to define cultivation standards for freshwater fish, published as ABNT standards in 2015.
Recently, GeneSeas, with a production plant in São Paulo, achieved Best Aquaculture Practices (BAP) certification, endorsed by the Global Aquaculture Alliance (GAA) organization, with a view to exporting tilapia.
And finally...
I found some news about the entry of the world's largest tilapia producer, Regal Springs, into Brazil, through a joint venture with the Brazilian Axial Holding, creating Tilabras.
The State of São Paulo couldn't be left out, could it?
