This article was first published in the January 2025 edition of International Aquafeed
A frequent query I get in my role with the Marine Ingredients Organisation (IFFO) is “how sustainable are fishmeal and fish oil really?” Well, that really depends on what we mean by “sustainable”. There is a plethora of definitions out there on what sustainability is, each often more esoteric than the last. But a good, clear, and simple one is that proposed by former World Bank Chief Economist Herman Daly, in what is called the” Daly Rules Approach”. What these rules suggest (among other things) is that the sustainable use of renewable resources (like fish stocks) requires that the rate of consumption not exceed the rate at which resources regenerate. That is a difficult one to argue with, as most can see the clear logic here.
When we consider sustainability on the Daly Rules Approach classification, then most of the major fisheries supplying whole fish resource into the industry are sustainable. And that’s not just my opinion, check out the details on the website of eNGO Sustainable Fisheries Partnership, or the Monterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch, which has the Peruvian anchoveta fishery as a green (Best Choice) rating. While there are still some troubled small pelagic fisheries out there, things are for the most part getting a lot better than they were twenty years ago.
However, most pundits like seeing metrics (measures) that are simple, like a single number. So it is kind of understandable how metrics like the fish-in:fish-out (FIFO) ratio evolved, even if they are a poor measure of sustainability. Unfortunately, it took a few publications for academia work out how to best represent FIFO, but that was sorted out back in 2009, and then people moved onto the forage fish dependency ratio (FFDR), once they worked out that the fishery by-product use in fishmeal production was actually a really positive thing and shouldn’t be penalised or criticised. However, FFDR, like FIFO also doesn’t discriminate between a well manged and/or sustainable fishery over a poorly managed or unsustainable one. So, neither are very good metrics for sustainability either. Another argument on the FIFO and FFDR front is that the use of fish as feed is simply something that shouldn’t be done. But we could say that about any food production. I was recently checking out the 2022 global grain statistics (2022; as more recent years are just estimates) only to find out that over 40% of global grain (cereals and oilseeds) production is fed to an animal. Yes, over a billion tonnes of grain each year is fed to an animal, like pigs, chickens and fish. If we look at global fish production in 2022 by contrast, of the 192 million metric tonnes produced, only 17.2 million tonnes was used directly as feed. That’s less than 9% of the total. So, maybe if we REALLY want to fix the feed/food issue, then maybe we should also focus on redirecting grain to better feed the people?
While I agree that the use of food grade fish as direct human consumption (DHC) is the ideal outcome, that too will still always produce marine ingredients as by-products of that process. In 2023 we neared 40% of global marine ingredient production from by-products, with more than 50% of fish oil now coming from by-products. So, with independent eNGOs rating the small pelagic fisheries as among the best managed, and with green ratings, and a growing proportion of product coming from by-products maybe soon we will all begin to realise that sustainability is so much more than FIFO.