ISARIBI NO.51

ISSN1346-2512

NO.51 SEPT. 2006

JapanFisheries
AssociationSankaido Bldg.,
9-13 Akasaka 1, Minato-ku,
Tokyo, Japan 107-0052
tel: 81-3-3585-6683
http//www.suisankai.or.jp

Views and Opinions of Japan’s Fisheries Industry

Responsible Trade & Consumption

All Stakeholders Are Called Upon to Ensure
Responsible Trade and Consumptionof Fishery Products“All stakeholders--producers, traders, distributors,
and consumers--are now being called upon to consider
ways to ensure responsible trade and consumption offishery products,” said Akinori Enoki, associate
professor of Kinki University.
Speaking under the title: “In pursuit of a desirable
state of fishery product trade” at an April symposiumin Tokyo, Enoki stressed that “engaging in fisheries
that is responsible for the resources and theenvironment has become a significant goal for us topursue.”
The symposium was intended to discuss the direction
Japan should take at this time when Japan’s imports
are showing a slight decrease from the previous levels
due partly to increasing demand for fishery products
worldwide.
Enoki noted that “consumption of fishery products
in China saw a rapid growth from 14.53 million tons
(per-capita amount:12.4 kg) in 1991-1993 to 31.81
million tons (25.4 kg) in 1999-2001.”“Japan remains the world’s largest importer of fish
now. But we should note that China is increasing its
dependence on imported fish backed by strong
consumption at home. The country will certainly
become a super-large importer if fish diet expands fromcoastal areas to inland,” he added.
“From the perspective of the present status offishery resources in the world, it is not possible tofurther boost the supply of fish worldwide. How
traders and processors get involved in the world’s
fishery resources will become an important issue ofsocial responsibility of fisheries enterprises.”
Enoki further said that “the responsibility ofconsumers will also be tested. Consumers should not

World’s Fishery Product Imports (top 30 counties)(Unit: quantities in tons; value in US$1,000)
2004
Q u a n titie s O r d e r
V a lu e
O rd e r
W o rld to ta l 2 9 ,7 1 5 ,7 0 5
7 6 ,3 1 9 ,6 6 7
Japan
3 ,4 7 8 ,7 7 81
1 4 ,8 3 0 ,0 8 0
1
C h in a2 ,9 7 7 ,0 7 7
23 ,1 6 7 ,6 5 6
6U .S .
2 ,3 0 0 ,3 2 1
31 2 ,0 7 8 ,6 8 92S p a in
1 ,5 5 9 ,6 5 1
45 ,2 3 8 ,6 6 0
3D e n m a rk
1 ,4 2 4 ,8 1 7
52 ,3 6 8 ,8 3 8
9K o re a
1 ,2 8 5 ,0 0 6
62 ,2 5 8 ,7 1 1
10T h a ila n d
1 ,2 4 0 ,1 8 1
71 ,2 5 4 ,6 1 717F ra n c e
1 ,1 0 4 ,6 4 3
84 ,2 1 6 ,7 3 64G e rm a n y
1 ,0 3 1 ,8 0 8
92 ,8 3 0 ,9 1 88Ita ly
9 3 1 ,7 7 0
103 ,9 1 9 ,0 8 2
5
R u s s ia
9 0 7 ,7 1 8 1 1
7 7 0 ,0 6 8
18U .K .
8 8 2 ,5 4 9
122 ,8 4 3 ,0 2 1
7N e th e r la n d s
7 2 8 ,7 9 5
131 ,8 5 0 ,1 6 5
12N o rw a y
6 2 1 ,7 3 614
6 8 1 ,9 4 1
20
N ig e ria
5 7 0 ,4 4 115
3 9 7 ,4 3 6
27C anada
4 8 2 ,9 4 6161 ,5 6 7 ,6 5 1
13
T a iw a n
3 8 5 ,3 6 417
5 1 7 ,8 1 2
24
H ong Kong
3 6 5 ,6 5 4
18
1 ,9 2 8 ,6 1 8
11
P o rtu g a l
3 4 6 ,9 5 7
19
1 ,2 6 4 ,8 6 2
16Sw eden3 3 4 ,6 7 720
1 ,3 0 3 ,6 5 4 1 5M a la y s ia
3 2 5 ,1 6 321
5 3 8 ,1 1 223
P o la n d
3 1 1 ,9 1 822
5 8 4 ,9 6 1
22
B e lg iu m
3 0 9 ,5 5 323
1 ,5 3 0 ,9 5 3
14
U k r a in e
3 0 7 ,6 6 524
1 3 9 ,9 4 039
A u s tr a lia
2 8 3 ,1 8 825
7 3 0 ,7 4 519Egypt
2 4 1 ,9 4 726
1 3 4 ,3 8 241
Iv o r y C o a s t
2 1 8 ,9 6 627
1 6 6 ,1 4 533
Ic e la n d
2 1 7 ,7 9 928
1 1 7 ,3 6 744
S in g a p o r e
1 9 6 ,7 8 829
6 3 5 ,9 2 721
B r a z il
1 7 4 ,0 6 030
2 8 2 ,9 3 130
C o u n tr yISARIBI: First published by the Japan Fisheries Association in October 1992.
JFA President: Isao Nakasu; Editor: Masashi Nishimura

ISARIBI NO.51

SEPT. 2006

seek to buy low-priced imported products to the extentof destroying the environment of exporting countries.”“The time will come when consumers should buy,at their own responsibility, the products that meet therequirements of the resources and the environment,”
Enoki concluded.
Professor Haruko Yamashita of Meikai University,
who spoke from the floor at the symposium, pointed
out: “It is important that we become aware of theimportance of responsible consumption. Although Japanis faced with an issue of improving its self-sufficiency
in fisheries production, there is a concern that, if wetake small-stock fish in larger quantities, the resources
may be depleted in several years.”“The species such as bigeye tuna or bluefin tuna
are consumed mostly in Japan, and Japan will certainly
be responsible if their resources are depleted. We
should take these issues into account when we consider
trade and consumption in fishery products,” she said.

million tons from 2003.
Import value also rose to a record level of $76.3
billion, up 12% from the previous year.
While imports of fishery products have broken
record levels in recent years, fishery production hasreached a ceiling against a background of the fullest
possible use of the world fishery resources.
Analysts attribute the continuing growth in imports
to such factors as an increasing global demand forfish reflecting the pursuit of healthy food, expanding
aquaculture production for exports, and expanding
trade through consigned processing in China and othercountries.
Changes in World Fishery Product Imports(Source: FAO; unit in tons; value in US$1.000)
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004

Fishery Product Trade Posts
Record Level in Volume and Value
According to the United Nations Food andAgricultural Organization (FAO), imports of fisheryproducts on a worldwide basis surged to yet anotherhigh level of 29.72 million tons in 2004, up 4% or 1.14

Q u a n t it ie s
2 2 ,3 2 3 ,3 9 3
2 2 ,6 9 1 ,9 4 2
2 3 ,5 9 4 ,1 2 0
2 2 ,5 5 7 ,0 8 8
2 4 ,2 2 6 ,2 1 3
2 6 ,5 4 3 ,0 0 1
2 7 ,9 0 3 ,9 2 02 8 ,0 8 0 ,3 2 2
2 8 ,5 7 8 ,3 0 62 9 ,7 1 5 ,7 0 5

V a lu e
5 7 ,0 6 9 ,6 9 1
5 8 ,0 9 4 ,6 0 3
5 7 ,5 7 3 ,4 0 8
5 6 ,1 0 8 ,1 5 8
5 8 ,5 7 4 ,5 7 1
6 0 ,9 8 1 ,1 9 6
6 0 ,5 6 8 ,3 1 5
6 2 ,4 9 3 ,5 0 9
6 8 ,3 4 8 ,3 2 4
7 6 ,3 1 9 ,6 6 7International Whaling Commission

IWC NOTES WHALING MORATORIUM
NO LONGER NECESSARY- IWC COMMISSIONERS DECLARE COMMITMENTTO NORMALISING IWC-T

he International Whaling Commission (IWC)
declared its commitment to normalizing thefunctions of the IWC in the ST. KITTS AND
NEVIS DECLARATION adopted at its 58th session
held in St. Kitts and Nevis, June 16-20. Japan alsoannounced its intention to host a meeting fornormalization of the IWC, and it was agreed that themeeting will be held in Tokyo early 2007. It is expectedthat the meeting will make a breakthrough in thedeadlock of the 14-year-long discussion in the IWC
toward termination of the moratorium which is no longer
necessary as noted in the Declaration.
The resumption of commercial whaling has a muchbroader implication than just the promotion of thesustainable use of resources. This is a question of how
the international community acknowledges the issueof cultural liberty when a certain cultural practice isbanned for more than 14 years for no scientificjustification. The concept of cultural liberty is thoroughly
discussed in the Human Development Report 2004
issued by the United Nations Development Programme,
and the issue is condensed in the following excerpt.
“People’s cultural identities must be recognized andaccommodated by the state, and people must be free
to express these identities without being discriminatedagainst in other aspects of their lives. In short: culturalliberty is a human right and an important aspect ofhuman development—and thus worthy of state action
and attention.”
The creation of peaceful society cannot be realized
without the recognition of cultural pluralism. With thehope of advancement of the whaling discussion as one
cultural issue, Isaribi introduces the ST. KITTS AND
NEVIS DECLARATION as follows.

Page 2

ISARIBI NO.51

SEPT. 2006

ST. KITTS AND NEVISDECLARATIONEMPHASISING that the use of cetaceans in many
parts of the world including the Caribbean, contributes
to sustainable coastal communities, sustainable
livelihoods, food security and poverty reduction andthat placing the use of whales outside the context ofthe globally accepted norm of science-based
management and rule-making for emotional reasons
would set a bad precedent that risks our use of fisheries
and other renewable resources;
FURTHER EMPHASING that the use of marine
resources as an integral part of development options
is critically important at this time for a number ofcountries experiencing the need to diversify theiragriculture;
UNDERSTANDING that the purpose of the 1946
International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling(ICRW) is to ‘provide for the proper conservation ofwhale stocks and thus make possible the orderly
development of the whaling industry’ (quoted from thePreamble to the Convention) and that the International
Whaling Commission (IWC) is therefore about
managing whaling to ensure whale stocks are not overharvested rather than protecting all whales irrespectiveof their abundance;
NOTING that in 1982, the IWC adopted a moratoriumon commercial whaling (paragraph 10e of the Scheduleto the ICRW) without advice from the Commission’s
Scientific Committee that such measure was requiredfor conservation purposes;
FURTHER NOTING that the moratorium which wasclearly intended as a temporary measure is no longer
necessary, that the Commission adopted a robust andrisk-averse procedure (RMP) for calculating quotas
for abundant stocks of baleen whales in 1994 and that
the IWC’s own Scientific Committee has agreed thatmany species and stocks of whales are abundant andsustainable whaling is possible;
CONCERNED that after 14 years of discussion andnegotiation, the IWC has failed to complete andimplement a management regime to regulatecommercial whaling.
ACCEPTING that scientific research has shown thatwhales consume huge quantities of fish making theissue a matter of food security for coastal nations andrequiring that the issue of management of whale stocks

Photo by courtesy of the Japan Whaling Associationmust be considered in a broader context of ecosystemmanagement since eco-system management has now
become an international standard.
REJECTING as unacceptable that a number ofinternational NGOs with self-interest campaigns should
use threats in an attempt to direct government policy
on matters of sovereign rights related to the use ofresources for food security and national development;
NOTING that the position of some members that are
opposed to the resumption of commercial whaling ona sustainable basis irrespective of the status of whale
stocks is contrary to the object and purpose of theInternational Convention for the Regulation of Whaling;
UNDERSTANDING that the IWC can be saved fromcollapse only by implementing conservation andmanagement measures which will allow controlled andsustainable whaling which would not mean a return tohistoric over-harvesting and that continuing failure to
do so serves neither the interests of whale conservation
nor management;
NOW THEREFORE:
COMMISSIONERS express their concern that
the IWC has failed to meet its obligations under
the terms of the ICRW and,
DECLARE our commitment to normalising thefunctions of the IWC based on the terms of theICRW and other relevant international law,respect for cultural diversity and traditions ofcoastal peoples and the fundamental principles
of sustainable use of resources, and the need forscience-based policy and rulemaking that areaccepted as the world standard for themanagement of marine resources.

Page 3

ISARIBI NO.51

SEPT. 2006

VIOLENT ACTIVITIES OF NGOSCONDEMNED UNANIMOUSLY

Recalling the International Regulations for Preventing
Collisions at Sea which set uniform principles and rules
for avoiding collisions at sea,

V

Recalling further the guidelines of the International
Maritime Organization relating to consultation andcooperation in marine casualty investigations,

iolent NGOs, such as Greenpeace, have been
engaged in activities which may be a risk tohuman life in their protest of research whaling.
As the latest example, the Greenpeace activist vessel
the Arctic Sunrise deliberately rammed the Nisshinmaru, a Japanese vessel conducting research whaling,on Sunday, 8 January 2006 as reported by Isaribi 48.
Both pro-whaling and anti-whaling countries wereseriously concerned that dangerous confrontations risk
human life, property, and the order of maritime
navigation, and may lead to grave accidents. They
cosponsored and adopted by consensus THE
RESOLUTION ON THE SAFETY OF VESSELSENGAGED IN WHALING AND WHALERESEARCH-RELATED ACTIVITIES. TheResolution has made clear that they do not condone
any actions that are a risk to human life and property
in relation to these activities of vessels at sea. Thefollowing is the full text of the resolution
RESOLUTION ON THE SAFETY OF
VESSELS ENGAGED IN WHALING AND
WHALE RESEARCH-RELATEDACTIVITIES
Submitted byAustralia, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, UnitedStates of America
Whereas the safety of vessels and crew and the orderof maritime navigation are, and have long been, thecommon interest of nations worldwide,
Whereas the Commission and Contracting
Governments support the right to legitimate andpeaceful forms of protest and demonstration,
Mindful of the fact that issues relating to confrontation
between vessels at sea and in port have been discussed
by this Commission as well as other international for a
including the International Maritime Organization,
Recognizing the fact that domestic and international
concerns have been expressed concerningconfrontation at sea and port relating to whaling andwhale research activities,
Seriously concerned that dangerous confrontations risk
human life, property, and the order of maritime
navigation, and may lead to grave accidents,

Now therefore this Commission,
Agrees and Declares that the Commission andits contracting Governments do not condone any
actions that are a risk to human life and property
in relation to these activities of vessels at sea,
and urges persons and entities to refrain from such
acts;
Encourages Contracting Governments to takeappropriate measures, consistent with IMO
guidelines, in order to ensure that the substanceand spirit of this Resolution are observed -both domestically and internationally.

DECEPTION
OF “INTERIM” PROHIBITIONA

s has been witnessed with the adoption of theST. KITTS AND NEVIS DECLARATION,
the 58th session of the IWC has taken a small
step toward normalization of the Commission that has
been dysfunctional for 14 years. Despite its historicadvancement, however, there is a long way to go towin the three-quarters majority required to overturn theban on commercial whaling.
This gives us an invaluable lesson regarding theimplication of “interim” prohibition relevant to any fishingactivities. Turning our eyes to international fora related
to the conservation and use of marine life, other thanthe IWC, such as the United Nations Open-ended
Informal Consultative Process on Oceans and the Lawof the Sea (UNICPOLOS), civil society and scientists
have been promoting the “interim” prohibition of fishingactivities as if this is a win-win solution to enhance
productivity of the oceans which will lead to bigger
catches.
We should remember, though, that once such an“interim” prohibition is introduced, driven by NGOs with
self-interest campaigns, and not as a part of a stockenhancement program with the cooperation of scientists
and fishermen, “interim” in reality means “decades” oreven “a century.” This is because its objective is toban the use of marine life irrespective of the stock status
as the 14 year history of discussion in the IWC
demonstrates. The need to normalize the term
“INTERIM” should also be discussed in the IWC.

The readers are cordially invited to send their comments on articles in this issue to mnishimu@suisankai.or.jp--Editor