T R A F F I C The Southern Bluefin Tunamarket in China
R

E

P

O

JUNE 2017

R

T

Joyce Wu

TRAFFIC REPORTTRAFFIC, the wild­life trade monitoringnet­work, is the leading non-governmentalorganization working globally on trade inwild animals and plants in the context of bothbiodiversity conservation and sustainable
development. TRAFFIC is a strategic allianceof WWF and IUCN.
Reprod­uction of material appearing in thisreport requires written­permission fromthe publisher.
The designations of geographical entities inthis publication, and the presentation of thematerial, do not imply the expression of any
opinion whatsoever on the part of TRAFFIC
or its supporting ­organizations con­cern­ing
the legal status of any country, territory, or
area, or of its authorities, or concerning thedelimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
The views of the authors expressed in thispublication are those of the writers and do notnecessarily reflect those of TRAFFIC, WWF
or IUCN.
Published by TRAFFIC
East Asia Regional Officec/o WWF Hong Kong
15/F, Manhattan Centre, 8 Kwai Cheong
Road. Kwai Chung N.T. Hong Kong, SAR© TRAFFIC 2017. Copyright of material
published in this report is vested in TRAFFIC.
ISBN no: 978-1-85850-419-3
UK Registered Charity No. 1076722
Suggested Citation:
Wu. J. (2017). The Southern Bluefin Tuna
Market in China. TRAFFIC. Hong Kong,
SAR.
Front cover photograph: Southern Bluefin
Tuna Thunnus maccoyii circling in holding
pen, Port Lincoln, South Australia.
Photo credit: © naturepl.com/David
Fleetham/WWF

The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in
China©NATUREPL.COM/DAVID FLEETHAM/WWF

Joyce Wu

Southern Bluefin Tuna Thunnus maccoyii circling in holding pen, Port Lincoln, South Australia.

This study was conducted with the kind support ofTABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements............................................................................................. iii
Abbreviations and Acronyms............................................................................ iv
Executive Summary............................................................................................ vi
Background and Introduction........................................................................... 1
Methodology........................................................................................................ 2
Mainland China sashimi tuna trade............................................................. 2
Sashimi tuna sample collection..................................................................... 5
Results................................................................................................................... 8
Sashimi tuna catch.......................................................................................... 8
Mainland China sashimi tuna trade and retention.................................... 10
		 Based on mainland China Customs data and UN Comtrade records......... 10
		 Based on trade partners’ SBT data............................................................ 12
		 Percentage of SBT retention in mainland China...................................... 14
Hong Kong SAR sashimi tuna trade and retention.................................... 15
		 Based on Hong Kong SAR CSD data and UN Comtrade records.......... 15
		 Based on trade partners’ SBT data............................................................ 18
		 Percentage of SBT retention in Hong Kong SAR...................................... 20
Sashimi tuna market....................................................................................... 22
Discussion and Conclusion................................................................................ 28
Recommendations............................................................................................... 29
References............................................................................................................. 30
Annex.................................................................................................................... 32

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in Chinaii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This report was made possible with financial support from the Commission for the Conservation ofSouthern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT).
Many people provided support to this report. The author would like to express thanks to all those
who helped to make this report possible by providing advice as well as sharing their knowledge on
the subject.
The author gratefully acknowledges many shopkeepers in Beijing and Shanghai for providing
information. The author would also like to thank Guan Jing, Xu Ling, Xiao Yu and Wilson Lau
from TRAFFIC for their help with the sample collection, market survey, data collection andsample shipment. Sincere thanks also go to Campbell Davies and Jessica Farley from CSIRO(Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation) on the tuna sampling design,
sample protocol and shipment.
The author would especially like to thank the reviewers from TRAFFIC: Glenn Sant, Yannick
Kuehl, Richard Thomas, Steven Broad, James Compton, Xu Ling and Zhou Fei for their comments
and advice on improving draft versions of this report, as well as Sean Lam and Rita Chang for theirgreat support.

iii

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in ChinaABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
ABTAtlantic Bluefin Tuna, Thunnus thynnus

BET

Bigeye Tuna, Thunnus obesus

BFT

Bluefin Tuna, a general term for Atlantic and Pacific Bluefin TunaCCSBT Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin TunaCDSCatch Documentation Scheme

CITES

Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild 		
Fauna and Flora

CNM

Cooperating Non-Members of CCSBT

CNY

Chinese Yuan

CSD

Census and Statistics Department, which keeps import and export 		data for Hong Kong SAR

CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
FAO

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

HKD

Hong Kong Dollar

IATTC Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission
ICCAT International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas
IOTC

Indian Ocean Tuna Commission

ISC

International Scientific Committee for Tuna and Tuna-like Species in
the North Pacific Ocean

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

iv

IUCN

International Union for the Conservation of Nature

IUU

Illegal, Unregulated and Unreported fisheries

Korea

Republic of Korea

NCNM

Non-Cooperating Non-Members of CCSBTPBTPacific Bluefin Tuna, Thunnus orientalis

RFMOs

Regional Fisheries Management Organizations

Sashimi tuna

Bigeye Tuna, Atlantic Bluefin Tuna, Pacific Bluefin Tuna, 		Southern Bluefin Tuna, and Yellowfin Tuna

SBTSouthern Bluefin Tuna, Thunnus maccoyii

TAC

Total Allowable Catch

TRAFFICThe wildlife trade monitoring network

UN Comtrade United Nations Commodity Trade Statistics Database
USD

United States Dollar

WCPFC

Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission

YFT

Yellowfin Tuna, Thunnus albacaresv

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe Southern Bluefin Tuna (SBT) is a high-value tuna species which is distributed between latitudes
30–50 S. The SBT fishery is managed by the Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin
Tuna (CCSBT) which sets an agreed annual total allowable catch (TAC) with Members andCooperating Non-Members (CNM) receiving a national allocation. Mainland China is neither aMember or CNM of CCSBT. If any SBT within the Chinese market is derived from China-flagged
vessels, it would identify China as a SBT Market State and potentially as a Flag State too.
Based on recorded catch and trade data from Regional Fisheries Management Organizations(RFMOs) kept by the General Administration of Customs of the People’s Republic of China,
mainland China retained more than 108 t of SBT in 2014, accounting for 0.61% of all tuna sashimi(Yellowfin Tuna (YFT), Bigeye Tuna (BET), Atlantic Bluefin Tuna (ABT), Pacific Bluefin Tuna
(PBT) and Southern Bluefin Tuna (SBT)) retained in mainland China.
Sashimi is not a traditional component of the Chinese diet, but a newly introduced fashion. The
researchers found that tuna sashimi was mainly offered for sale in Japanese-style restaurants,
e-commerce platforms, as well as some high-end supermarkets and high-end Chinese restaurants.
According to dianping.com1, there are around 7,380 Japanese-style restaurants in Shanghai (3,569),
Beijing (1,770) and Guangzhou1 (2,042) and these cities can be considered the main markets fortuna sashimi in mainland China.
Two hundred tuna sashimi samples were collected from Japanese-style restaurants in Beijing
and Shanghai in early 2016, to gain an insight into the tuna species composition in the market.
Restaurants were selected based on stratified random sampling. DNA tests conducted by CSIRO(Davies et al., 2016) found that 26 out of 199 tested tuna sashimi samples were SBT (13%). This isconsiderably less than found by similar research undertaken in 2011–2012 (26% out of the total
sample size, or 30% out of 88 Thunnus samples) (Anon., 2012). Of the 26 SBT samples identified,
25 were obtained in Shanghai and only one was from Beijing. Fifteen out of the 26 SBT samples
were from the mid-price category (CNY 201-4002), only two SBT samples were from the high-pricerestaurant category (>CNY400). However, there may well be significant variation in the tuna
species composition between cities, restaurant price categories and different times of the year,
so caution should be applied before extrapolating these findings to the wider Chinese market,
especially given the small sample size. Nevertheless, the results provide a starting point to gain an
insight into the species of tuna available in the sashimi market in mainland China.
However, it is also unclear to what extent all retained fresh and frozen tuna is used for sashimi.
YFT, for example, may be used in the manufacture of canned tuna. This and other factors may help
to explain discrepancies between the composition of tuna species found by market sampling andthe composition reported in retained tuna.
Further research is needed in order to produce more accurate estimates of overall SBT
consumption in mainland China. No restaurant samples were obtained from Guangzhou, forexample, which may prove to be a significant centre for SBT consumption, while at least two major
business to consumer (B2C) e-commerce websites based in mainland China were offering both
BFT and SBT for sale.
12

dianping.com is an online restaurant search and recommendation platform in mainland China.
1 CNY = 0.15287 USD. The average monthly exchange rate from January to March 2016 between Chinese Yuan (CNY) and US dollars(USD) was obtained from an exchange rate website. https://www.oanda.com/currency/average

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in ChinaviRECOMMENDATIONS
Encourage all CCSBT Members and CNMs to report their annual SBT catch to FAO tokeep accurate and up to date information in the database.
Encourage Australia and New Zealand to check with UN Comtrade on their trade data
records for better consistency.
Encourage countries/territories to change their Customs HS CODES as soon as possible
to follow World Customs Organization (WCO) recommendations for better comparison
between importers and exporters.
Encourage countries/territories to make Customs trade data publically accessible (e.g.
online) or, at least to provide data upon request, without charge.
Encourage Japan to confirm all sashimi tuna trade volumes with mainland China andHong Kong SAR to eliminate any possible illegal trade.
Encourage Japan to record all values of import and export, including those equal orunder JPY 200,000 in value, and report all recorded trade to UN Comtrade for a better
estimation of global trade.
There are likely to be other places in mainland China with high sashimi tuna
consumption, e.g. Guangzhou. Therefore, more sampling in these centres for DNA testingis necessary to understand better sashimi tuna species composition across mainland
China.

vii

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

viii

BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION
The Southern Bluefin Tuna (SBT) is a high-value tuna species which is distributed between
latitudes 30–50 S. The SBT fishery is managed by the Commission for the Conservation ofSouthern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT) which sets an agreed annual total allowable catch (TAC) withMembers and Cooperating Non-Members (CNM) receiving a national allocation. However, inorder to estimate the trade and global catch of SBT better, and to assist in the detection of potential
Illegal, Unregulated and Unreported (IUU) trade in SBT, the CCSBT also monitors the trade withcountries that are “Non-Cooperating Non-Members” (NCNM).
China is a member of four of the five tuna Regional Fisheries Management Organizations(RFMOs)3 (Western Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC), Indian Ocean Tuna
Commission (IOTC), International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT)
and Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC)). China is not a member or cooperating
non-member of CCSBT, although SBT appears to be traded within the domestic market and(re)exported. If any SBT within the Chinese market was derived from China-flagged vessels, it would
identify China as a SBT Market State and potentially as a Flag State too.
SBT is a very high value fisheries product traditionally and exclusively consumed as sashimi rather
than other types of tuna products. DNA tests of sashimi-grade tuna samples obtained by WWF
from restaurants and supermarkets in Shanghai and Beijing in 2011–2012 identified 26 out of 100
samples as SBT (Anon., 2012). The degree to which SBT appeared to be present in the Chinese
market did not seem to tally with what would be expected based on the import quantities reported
in Chinese Customs statistics: 10.3 t in 2011 and 3.8 t in 20124.
Chinese Customs data showed that mainland China imported relatively small quantities of frozen
SBT in 2011 (9,864 kg) and 2012 (1,674 kg), with imports jumping to 34,290 kg in 2013, 102,936 kg
in 2014 and 111,914 kg in 2015, a total of approximately 261 t of frozen SBT over the five years.
However, Customs data from China show reported (re)exports of around 50.6 t of frozen SBT
between 2011 and 2013, more than the total imported frozen SBT (34.3 t) in the same period.
These data indicate that some SBT might either have been traded to mainland China throughundocumented channels and thus not recorded by the General Administration of Customs of thePeople’s Republic of China, or may have been landed by China-flagged vessels and again were notdocumented.
To gain a better understanding of the presence and potential sources of SBT traded and/or
consumed in mainland China, desk-based research and a market survey “snapshot” were carriedout. Market research focused in particular on increasing the understanding of the availabilityof SBT in Japanese-style restaurants offering sashimi tuna in Beijing and Shanghai. In total, 200
sashimi-grade tuna samples from restaurants in these cities were collected for the purposes of DNA
testing to confirm the species of tuna. This sampling and identification technique demonstrated it
to be a useful method for undertaking a wider analysis of SBT markets in Shanghai and Beijing.

RFMOs are international organizations focused on the management of fisheries resources in particular areas of international waters.
RFMOs may focus on particular highly-migratory species, such as tuna, throughout vast geographical areas.
4
Based on Chinese Customs statistics, mainland China imported frozen SBT only from Japan in 2011 and only from Australia in 2012
and 2013.
3

1

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

METHODOLOGY
Mainland China sashimi tuna trade
For the estimation of Southern Bluefin Tuna presence in mainland China, the catch of Bigeye Tuna
(BET), Bluefin Tuna (BFT), Yellowfin Tuna (YFT) and SBT for mainland China, between 2011 and2014, were obtained from six different RFMOs5 (Table 1).
Table 1. Catch data recorded by different RFMOs
RFMOs

Stocks of tuna

CCSBT
https://www.ccsbt.org/en/content/sbt-data

Southern Bluefin

IATTC
http://www.iattc.org/CatchReportsDataENG.htm

Pacific Bigeye
Eastern Pacific Yellowfin

ICCAT
http://www.iccat.es/sbull/SB43-1-2016/index.html

Atlantic Bigeye
Eastern Atlantic Bluefin
Western Atlantic Bluefin
Atlantic Yellowfin

IOTC
http://www.iotc.org/documents/nominal-catchspecies-and-gear-vessel-flag-reporting-country

Indian Ocean Bigeye
Indian Ocean Yellowfin

ISC
http://isc.fra.go.jp/fisheries_statistics/index.html

Pacific Bluefin

WCPFC
https://www.wcpfc.int/statistical-bulletins

Pacific Bigeye
Western and Central Pacific Bigeye
Western and Central Pacific Yellowfin

Information source: Fishery Statistical Collections Global Tuna Catches by Stock, http://www.fao.org/fishery/statistics/
tuna-catches/4/en

The trade data for four sashimi tuna—BET, BFT, YFT and SBT—for mainland China, Hong Kong
SAR and six CCSBT members (Australia, Indonesia, Japan, Republic of Korea, New Zealand andthe Fishing Entity of Taiwan) were obtained to understand if there were data recording gaps and toobtain an estimation of the overall trade.
The trade of fresh and frozen commodities for BET, BFT, YFT and SBT from 2011 to 2015 wereobtained from the United Nations Commodity Trade Statistics Database (UN Comtrade), which
provided commodity trade records with six-digit HS (Harmonized System) codes. The trade ofeight sashimi tuna commodities beginning with 0302 (fresh) and 0303 (frozen) were collected(Table 2). The bluefin tuna trade recorded in UN Comtrade includes both Atlantic Bluefin Tuna andPacific Bluefin Tuna.

5

Catch data in 2015 were not available.

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

2

Table 2. The trade of fresh and frozen tuna commodities recorded in UN Comtrade.
Commodity Codes Commodity
030232

Yellowfin Tuna, fresh

030234

Bigeye Tuna, fresh

030235

Bluefin Tuna, fresh

030236Southern Bluefin Tuna, fresh

030342

Yellowfin Tuna, frozen

030344

Bigeye Tuna, frozen

030345

Bluefin Tuna, frozen

030346Southern Bluefin Tuna, frozen

Customs trade records for sashimi tuna commodities, under the codes of 0302 and 0303 frommainland China and Hong Kong SAR, as well as five CCSBT members (Australia, Japan, Republicof Korea, New Zealand and the Fishing Entity of Taiwan) between 2011 and 2015 were obtained
from relevant authorities (Table 3). For some countries/territories, the trade records for bluefin tuna
were separated into Atlantic Bluefin and Pacific Bluefin tuna (Table 4 and Annex 1).
Table 3. Information source for Customs trade data from different countries/territories
Countries/territories

Information source

Mainland China

China Cuslink Company, Ltd

Hong Kong SAR

Hong Kong’s Census and Statistics Department (CSD)

Australia

Multilateral and Migratory Stocks Section, Sustainable
Agriculture and Fisheries Division, Department of Agriculture
and Water Resources

Japan

Ministry of Financehttp://www.customs.go.jp/toukei/info/index_e.htm

Republic of Korea

Korea International Trade Association (KITA)
http://global.kita.net/

New ZealandStatistics New Zealand
http://www.stats.govt.nz/infoshare/TradeVariables.aspx?
DataType=TEX

Fishing Entity of
TaiwanTaiwan’s Bureau of Foreign Trade
http://cus93.trade.gov.tw/ENGLISH/FSCE/

Note: Customs data for Japan, Republic of Korea, New Zealand and the Fishing Entity of Taiwan are available online.

3

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

Table 4. List of Customs codes in mainland China and Hong Kong SAR for sashimi tunacommodities, 2011–2015
Tuna products

Mainland
China

Year

Hong
Year
Kong SAR

Yellowfin Tuna, fresh

03023200

2011–2015

03023200

2011–2015

Bigeye Tuna, fresh

03023400

2011–2015

03023400

2011–2015(Atlantic & Pacific) Bluefin Tuna, fresh

03023500

2011–2014

03023500

2011–2012

Atlantic Bluefin Tuna, fresh

03023510

2015

03023510

2013–2015

Pacific Bluefin Tuna, fresh

03023520

2015

03023520

2013–2015

Southern Bluefin Tuna, fresh

03023600

2011–2015

03023600

2011–2015

Yellowfin Tuna, frozen

03034200

2011–2015

03034200

2011–2015

Bigeye Tuna, frozen

03034400

2011–2015

03034400

2011–2015(Atlantic & Pacific) Bluefin Tuna, frozen

03034500

2011–2014

03034500

2011–2012

Atlantic Bluefin Tuna, frozen

03034510

2015

03034510

2013–2015

Pacific Bluefin Tuna, frozen

03034520

2015

03034520

2013–2015

Southern Bluefin Tuna, frozen

03034600

2011–2015

03034600

2011–2015

Only Hong Kong SAR and New Zealand clearly separated exports from re-exports in their
Customs data. Therefore, in this analysis, the term “(re)export” is used to refer to both, the trade
involving export and re-export.
Mainland China has 10 eight-digit Customs codes starting with 0302 and 0303 to record fresh andfrozen sashimi tuna trade, respectively. Mainland China has two Customs codes for live Atlantic(03019491) as well as Pacific (03019492) Bluefin Tuna. The live tuna trade was not included in thisstudy as live fish might be traded for research and/or as breeding stock, and would not enter themarket. Mainland China only imported 190 kg of live Pacific Bluefin Tuna from Japan in 2015,
and did not record any (re)export of live tuna. Mainland China has Customs code 03048700 and
16041400 for consolidated but not species specific tuna commodities. The trade data from these twocodes were not included in this research.
Hong Kong SAR also uses eight-digit Customs codes, but the coding system is not always
equivalent to mainland China’s system. However, for tuna commodities concerning this research,
Hong Kong SAR has the same 10-digit Customs codes beginning 0302 and 0303, although thecodes for Pacific and Atlantic Bluefin tuna were different for some of the period (Table 4).
The export data for SBT from Japan to mainland China and Hong Kong SAR were also obtained
from the Catch Documentation Scheme (CDS) system kept in the Fisheries Agency of Japan tocomplement Japan Customs data that do not record trade value equal or less than JPY 200,000(USD 2,123) (Japan Fisheries Authority in litt. to TRAFFIC).
FAO sashimi tuna catch and trade data from FishStatJ were available only up to 2011. Thus, the SBT
catch and trade data from 2007 to 2011 were obtained to understand the data reporting quality
from mainland China, Hong Kong SAR and six CCSBT members.

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

4

The trade value in Hong Kong SAR CSD was recorded in HKD and converted to USD forcomparison with the value recorded in UN Comtrade. The average annual currency exchange rates
from 2011 to 2015 between HKD and the USD were obtained from online sources6.
Table 5. The average annual currency exchange rate for HKD to USD, 2011—2015

Information source: http://www.oanda.com/currency/historical-rates/

Sashimi tuna sample collection
A restaurant search and recommendation website, 大眾點評 (Dai Zhong Dian Ping, dianping.
com)7 in mainland China was searched to gain an insight into the sashimi tuna market in Beijing
and Shanghai, as well as for selecting the 200 restaurants for two rounds of sashimi tuna sample
collection in January and March 2016 (Table 6). Restaurants were randomly selected and stratified
based on the average cost per person per meal (restaurant price) listed on dianping.com. During
sample collection, the restaurant location, the stated source of tuna purchased, the purchase priceand the claimed tuna species were obtained to provide further information about the SBT andother sashimi tuna in markets in Beijing and Shanghai.
Table 6. Restaurants visited for sashimi tuna collection in Beijing and Shanghai

Note: * restaurant price category is the average cost per person of restaurants stated on dianping.com** one of the restaurants visited did not show an average consumption price on dianping.com.

6
7

http://www.oanda.com/currency/historical-rates/
Dai Zhon Dian Ping, means public comments on the website http://www.dianping.com/

5

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

Twenty-six Japanese-style restaurants that offered SBT in an earlier study in 2012 in Beijing (5) and
Shanghai (21) (Anon., 2012) were included in the sashimi tuna sample collection pool for this study
in 2016.
The samples were all collected and preserved in RNA-Later, following the standard protocols
developed by CSIRO. Guidance on the size of each tissue sample and the process for cleaning
scissors/blades were provided in a step-by-step description to avoid tissue contamination. An
experienced laboratory scientist in mainland China also carried out a demonstration of actual
sample preparation for the benefit of the surveyors. The preserved frozen samples were thentransported to CSIRO in Australia for DNA analysis and species identification.
A bead-based extraction protocol (Machery Nagel Nucleomag) kit was used on an Eppendorf EP
motion robot to produce a 150uL archive solution and 50uL working stock of DNA in micro-titre
format plates (Davies et al., 2016). Archive plates of extracted DNA were stored in dedicated -80 °C freezers.
The working stock plates of extracted DNA were used for genotype sequencing of approximately
5,000 single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) loci.
DNA profiles consisted of information collected from 5,000 SNP loci for each individual.
Genetic distances (i.e. percent difference between two individuals) were calculated for pairwise
comparisons of all collected samples as well as comparisons to DNA profiles from control samplesof known eight Thunnus and Skipjack Tuna species previously genotyped by CSIRO. Sequencing
artefact errors on the Illumina sequencer occur at 1% or less frequency and thus individuals withless than 1% differences were considered to be samples of the same individual. Percent sequence
differences of 2–3% were considered conspecifics and assigned the identification of the matching
control species (Davies et al., 2016).
Figure 1. Locations of restaurants in Shanghai for sashimi tuna sampling

Source: Map data © 2017 Google
Note: Red and blue dots were visited during the first and second round of sample collection, respectively.

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

6

Figure 2. Locations of restaurants in Beijing for sashimi tuna sampling

Source: Map data © 2017 Google
Note: Red and blue dots were visited during the first and second round of sample collection, respectively.

7

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

RESULTS
Sashimi tuna catch
FAO’s production data in FishstatJ included data only up to 2011. They contain estimated Skipjack
Tuna and tuna nei production, but no other tuna categories for mainland China (Table 7). The
annual production volume was 3,350–16,550 t and 11,700–40,300 t for Skipjack Tuna and tuna nei,
respectively, between 2007 and 2011.
Table 7. Mainland China tuna production (t), FAO 2007-2011.

All FAO estimates from available sources of information

For Southern Bluefin Tuna, FAO has estimated production only for Australia, New Zealand, South
Africa and the Fishing Entity of Taiwan (Table 8). Compared with CCSBT catch data (Annex 2),
FAO’s production estimates for Australia were apparently higher in three (2007, 2008 and 2011) out
of five years (Table 8 and Annex 2). Conversely, FAO’s production estimates for New Zealand andthe Fishing Entity of Taiwan were lower than CCSBT catch records. It is not clear if FAO’s SBT
production estimate for Australia is the estimated catch volume or the volume after SBT has been
fattened up in cages.
Table 8. Southern Bluefin Tuna production (t), FAO 2007-2011.

- : Nil or zero
All FAO estimates from available sources of information

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

8Based on the catch data of RFMOs, mainland China caught between 41,880–47,957 t of sashimi
tuna (BET, YFT, BFT) annually from 2011 to 2014, but there was no report of SBT catch in that
period (Table 9). Mainland China’s annual catch of BFT was very limited, no more than 38 t
annually. The YFT catch was large and fluctuated, accounting for 44-48% (18,428-22,665 t) of thetotal annual sashimi tuna catch for mainland China. BET was the most harvested sashimi tuna; theannual catch was 23,415-26,327 t (52-56%) between 2011 and 2014.
Table 9. Mainland China sashimi tuna catch volume (kg), 2011-2014

9

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

Mainland China sashimi tuna trade and retention
Based on mainland China Customs data and UN Comtrade records
The sashimi tuna trade records kept by mainland China Customs and in UN Comtrade reported
by mainland China matched well in general (Annex 3). Obvious discrepancies were observed for
BFT in 2012 and 2013. BFT imports in 2012 and 2013 as well as (re)exports in 2012 were recorded
in UN Comtrade, but not in mainland China Customs data (Annex 3). Some minor difference also
existed for the import of YFT in 2014 and 2015. Mainland China Customs data recorded lower YFT
import than UN Comtrade in 2014, but higher import in 2015. The trade records of BET and SBT
were exactly the same in both datasets.
The annual retention for sashimi tuna in mainland China was estimated based on the catch volumeplus import and minus (re)export volume. Because the catch data from RFMOs were not available
for 2015, it was not possible to estimate the sashimi tuna retention by mainland China for that year
(Table 9). However, the retention estimation for SBT in 2015 was possible owing to there being norecorded SBT catch for mainland China.

Unit Price
Regarding the sashimi tuna import to mainland China, BFT had the highest annual unit price(33–48 USD/kg), higher than the annual unit price for SBT (21–32 USD/kg) (Table 10). The
low annual unit import price for BET and YFT may result from the relatively large amount of
national catch.
The unit prices for SBT imported by mainland China varied across different exporters anddifferent years (Table 11). The annual unit price was high for imported SBT from New Zealand(32 USD/kg), followed by Japan (30 USD/kg), Australia (23 USD/kg) and Indonesia (5 USD/kg).
Based on UN Comtrade, Indonesia exported 1,500 kg of SBT to mainland China in 2013 for
2,250 USD, only 1.5 USD/kg.
Table 10. Unit price of mainland China imported sashimi tuna (USD/kg), 2011-2015

Information source: based on mainland China Customs data, 2011–2015

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

10

Table 11. Unit price of mainland China imported SBT (USD/kg), 2011-2015

Information source: based on mainland China Customs data, 2011–2015

The annual (re)export of YFT was larger than import from 2011 to 2015 (Annex 3). The annual
retention of YFT in mainland China decreased from more than 20,091 t in 2011 to 14,890 t in 2013
and further dropped to less than 400 t in 2014 (Table 12). The combination of decreased catch andthe largely increased (re)export in 2014 resulted in the low level of YFT retention in 2014 (Table 12).
BET is another species of sashimi tuna with a large mainland China reported catch between 2011
and 2015 (Table 9). Mainland China Customs recorded trade for BET matched the records in UN
Comtrade (Annex 3). Mainland China’s annual (re)export of BET largely exceeded the import
volume (Annex 3). The annual retention of BET in mainland China increased from 20,061 t in 2011
to 22,210 t in 2013, then decreased to 17,164 t in 2014 (Table 12).
Mainland China reported a small catch of BFT and a low volume of trade compared to YFT and
BET although there are big discrepancies between the mainland China Customs data and UN
Comtrade records. UN Comtrade recorded mainland China imports of BFT from 2011 to 2015, and(re)export of BFT in 2011, 2012 and 2014 (Annex 3). However, the mainland China Customs data
had no record of BFT imports for 2012 and 2013 and also did not have records for BFT (re)exportfor 2012 (Annex 3). For the remaining years, the trade records for BFT between mainland China
Customs and UN Comtrade matched.
Because of the small catch (36 t), low import (26 t) and relatively high (re)export (249 t), the annual
retention of BFT in mainland China was negative (-187 t) in 2011. The retention in 2012 and 2013
was less than 40 t based on the mainland China Customs data, but was around 100 t based on UN
Comtrade data. The annual retention of BFT in mainland China increased to 137 t in 2014.
Mainland China imported SBT every year from 2011 to 2015, the annual imports increased from10 t in 2011 to 112 t in 2015 (except for a low import of 3.8 t in 2012). Mainland China only reexported SBT in 2013 (51 t to Hong Kong SAR) and 2015 (4 t to the Republic of Korea). In 2013, there-export (51 t) exceeded import (37 t) and resulted in a negative annual retention (-13.5 t) (Table
12). The SBT retention in 2014 (105 t) and 2015 (108 t) exceeded 100 t, because of sharply increased
imports.

11

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

Table 12. Sashimi tuna retention in mainland China (kg), 2011-2015

Based on trade partners’ SBT data
Mainland China Customs recorded imports of SBT from only four countries: Australia, Japan, New
Zealand and Indonesia between 2011 and 2015 (Table 13). The Customs data from Australia, Japan
and New Zealand also recorded the export of SBT to mainland China, but in different volumes(Table 13).
Although Australian Customs recorded lower annual export volumes to mainland China from2012 to 2015, the figures were very close to mainland China Customs import records (Table 13).
The largest gaps were observed in 2012 (1,674 kg difference) and 2013 (8,598 kg difference).
Due to the large data gaps between Japan’s export and mainland China’s import of SBT, SBT trade
data based on the Catch Documentation Scheme (CDS) from the Fisheries Agency of Japan wereobtained. Customs data from Japan recorded the export of SBT to mainland China only in 2011
(1,140 kg) (Table 13). However, Japan’s Catch Documentation Scheme (CDS) recorded around
1.6–10.9 t of SBT exports to mainland China between 2011 and 2015 (Table 13). Compared with the
combination of Japan’s Customs data and CDS data, mainland China Customs recorded a higher
volume of import from Japan in 2011 and 2015, but lower import for the other three years.

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

12

New Zealand Customs recorded the same amount of export as mainland China recorded imports
from 2012 to 2015, but not in 2011. In 2011, New Zealand recorded a higher volume of export (1,238 kg)
than mainland China recorded import (183 kg) (Table 13).
In the combined exporters’ records, mainland China reported higher annual SBT imports in 2011,2014 and 2015.
Table 13. SBT traded to mainland China (kg), 2011-2015

Information source: Customs data from Australia, Japan and New Zealand; Catch Documentation Scheme trade datafrom Japan Fisheries Agency; UN Comtrade data reported by Indonesia.

It is possible that mainland China did not re-export any SBT between 2011 and 2015. The unit
price for 50,582 kg of re-export in 2013 from mainland China to Hong Kong SAR was USD7,much lower than the mainland China average annual import value (26–32 USD/kg) between
2011 and 2013 (Table 10). It is possible that importers may under-report their import value to
avoid tariff and/or Value Added Tax., but for exporters this is unlikely since there is no tariff
for export. The Hong Kong SAR Census and Statistics Department (CSD) recorded import unit
price for SBT was 39 USD/kg in 2013, and was around 33–50 USD/kg between 2011 and 2015.
The re-export records in mainland China Customs data may result from mis-declaration at reexport.
The unit price for 4,218 kg of re-export to the Republic of Korea in 2015 was higher (USD25).
However, the Republic of Korea Customs did not record any SBT import from mainland
China, and as a CCSBT member, it was unlikely the Republic of Korea would import SBT frommainland China.
If mainland China did not re-export any SBT, mainland China SBT retention in 2013 would be
the same as the import volume, around 37 t, but not negative. The annual retention of SBT in
mainland China increased from 2011 to 2015, except for a downturn in 2012 (Table 12).

13

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

Percentage of SBT retention in mainland China
The total annual retention of sashimi tuna in mainland China was around 36,000–40,000 t
between 2011 to 2013, and dropped to around 17,800 t in 2014 (Table 12). This is because of thedramatic decrease of YFT retention in 2014, as a result of the more than doubling of (re)export(Annex 3).
Between 2011 and 2013, the annual retention of BET and YFT in mainland China accounted for
50–60% and 40–50% of total sashimi tuna retention, respectively (Table 14). However, the BET
retention in 2014 accounted for 96% of sashimi tuna retention in mainland China, resulting fromthe low retention of YFT (2.3%, around 400 t) in 2014 (Tables 12 and 14). The BFT annual retention
percentage was negative (-0.47%) in 2011, and increased to 0.77% in 2014. Based on mainland
China Customs data, the annual retention percentage for SBT was minor in 2011 (0.03%) and evenlower in 2012 (0.01%), became negative in 2013 (-0.04%), and increased to 0.59% in 2014. However,the negative SBT retention in 2013 could be as a result of incorrect (re)export reporting. Thus, it ispossible that the SBT retention in mainland China in 2013 was 40,857 kg and accounted for 0.11%
of annual sashimi tuna retention, based on reporters’ export volume and adjusted incorrect reexport volume recorded in mainland China Customs data (Tables 12 and 14).
The percentage of SBT retention increased from 0.01% to 0.62% (based on trading partners’ data) in2014 if YFT was excluded from the sashimi tuna estimation due to the low retention volume of YFT
in 2014. However, the SBT retention percentage increased from 0.11% to 0.18% in 2013.
Table 14. Percentage of sashimi tuna retention in mainland China, 2011-2015

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

14

Hong Kong SAR sashimi tuna trade and retention
Based on Hong Kong SAR CSD data and UN Comtrade records
The trade records of sashimi tuna kept by Hong Kong SAR CSD and UN Comtrade for Hong Kong
SAR matched well for BET and SBT for both import and re-export, except for a minor difference(18 kg) for BET import in 2014 (Annex 4). The annual imports of YFT matched closely with minor
differences in 2011, 2014 and 2015 (Annex 4). The re-export of YFT matched well in four out of five
years, but a big gap was observed in 2013. Hong Kong SAR CSD only recorded 124 t of re-export,
but UN Comtrade recorded 502 t of YFT re-export (Annex 4).
Regarding BFT, there were minor differences for Hong Kong SAR import in 2011 and 2015 (Annex
4). Large data discrepancies were observed for BFT import and re-export in 2012 and 2013.
UN Comtrade recorded lower import but much higher re-export of BFT in 2013. In 2012, UN
Comtrade recorded very close import and (re)export values for BFT but not for the corresponding
volume data (Annex 4). The value recorded in UN Comtrade (in USD) for 2012 is very close to theconverted value recorded in Hong Kong SAR CSD (in HKD). The difference (USD852 for importand USD42 for (re)export) might be due to the currency exchange conversion. On the other hand,in 2013, UN Comtrade also recorded very close value data, and lower import and higher (re)export
volumes (Annex 4). Hong Kong SAR CSD recorded 147 t of import and 18 t of re-export in 2013,
conversely, UN Comtrade recorded only around 51 t of import and 47 t of re-export for the same
year.
Hong Kong SAR CSD confirmed that the Hong Kong SAR tuna trade data recorded by the
CSD were submitted directly to UN Comtrade and thus did not know the reason for the data
discrepancy (Hong Kong SAR CSD pers. comm. to TRAFFIC, 2016).
Based on the Hong Kong SAR CSD Customs data, Hong Kong YFT retention was 221 t in 2011,
decreased to a low point (103 t) in 2013, and increased gradually to 199 t in 2015 (Table 15).
According to UN Comtrade, Hong Kong SAR re-exported high volumes of YFT in 2013 (502 t)
resulting in a negative retention (-276 t) (Table 15).
Hong Kong SAR had a large volume (397 t) of BET import in 2011, which then dropped sharply to avery low level (8–26 t) from 2012 to 2015. Like the import records, Hong Kong SAR also had a large
volume of re-export of SBT in 2011 (380 t), with very small or no re-export for the other four years.
The retention of BET in Hong Kong SAR was between 8 t and 27 t, with a low in 2013 and a high in2015 (Table 15).
The retention of BFT in Hong Kong SAR fluctuated between 69 t and 129 t, with highs in 2013 anda low in 2014, based on Hong Kong SAR CSD data (Table 15). However, based on UN Comtrade,the BFT retention in Hong Kong SAR was only 4 t in 2013. The BFT retention in 2012 cannot be
estimated due to a zero being recorded for the trade volume in the UN Comtrade data.
The trade records between Hong Kong SAR CSD and UN Comtrade data for SBT matchedcompletely: Hong Kong SAR imported a small but very different amount of SBT annually, from 43 kg
to 11 t between 2011 and 2015. Hong Kong SAR did not re-export any SBT in the same period oftime. Thus, all imported SBT was retained.
According to Hong Kong SAR CSD data, the total sashimi tuna retention was 346 t in 2011 andgradually decreased to 235 t in 2014, then increased to 355 t in 2015 (Table 15).

15

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

Although the UN Comtrade data for Hong Kong SAR resulted in a different volume of annual
retentions, especially a negative overall sashimi tuna retention in 2013, the trend was similar. The
retention based on UN Comtrade data was high in 2011, decreased to 2013 and increased somewhat
in 2014 and 2015 (Table 15).
Table 15. Sashimi tuna retention in Hong Kong SAR (kg), 2011-2015

Unit Price
As for mainland China, BFT import in Hong Kong SAR had the highest annual unit price( 41-56 USD/kg ), higher than the annual unit price for SBT ( 33-50 USD/kg ) (Table 16 ).
The unit prices of SBT import by Hong Kong SAR were different for different exporters andin different years ( Table 17 ). The annual unit price was high for imported SBT from
Australia ( 41 USD/kg ) and followed by New Zealand ( 5 USD/kg ), Japan ( 26 USD/kg ) andIndonesia ( 25 USD/kg ).

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

16

Table 16. Unit price of Hong Kong SAR imported sashimi tuna (USD/kg), 2011-2015

Information source: Hong Kong SAR CSD, 2011–2015

Table 17. Unit price of Hong Kong SAR imported SBT tuna (USD/kg), 2011-2015

Information source: Hong Kong SAR CSD, 2011–2015

17

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

Based on trade partners’ SBT data
According to Hong Kong SAR CSD data, Hong Kong SAR imported SBT from Japan (10,764 kg),
Indonesia (3,020 kg), Australia (2,393 kg) and New Zealand (37 kg) between 2011 and 2015 (Table
18). However, Customs data from Australia, Japan and New Zealand also reported SBT export toHong Kong SAR, but with different volumes. Japan Customs data only reported 200 kg exports of
SBT to Hong Kong SAR, much less than Hong Kong SAR’s record. Japan’s Catch Documentation
Scheme (CDS) recorded around 802–4,327 kg of SBT exports to Hong Kong SAR between 2013 and2015. Compared with the combination of Japan’s Customs data and CDS data, Hong Kong SAR
CSD still recorded a higher total volume of SBT imports between 2011 and 2015. However, Hong
Kong SAR recorded lower annual imports in 2011 and 2014.
On the other hand, Australia reported more SBT exports (5,044 kg) to Hong Kong SAR than Hong
Kong SAR’s records (2,393 kg). New Zealand exported a small amount of SBT exports to Hong
Kong SAR in 2012 (40 kg) and 2013 (37 kg), and Hong Kong SAR did not record the trade fromNew Zealand in 2012 (Table 18).
It is possible that Hong Kong SAR may import more SBT than Hong Kong SAR CSD recorded
if Indonesian Customs records were the same as the data recorded in UN Comtrade (Table 18).
According to UN Comtrade, Indonesia exported 28,810 kg of SBT to Hong Kong SAR between
2011 and 2014. Hong Kong SAR CSD only recorded 3,020 kg of SBT in 2012, but no import in theremaining four years. Indonesia reports in UN Comtrade showed that Hong Kong SAR may haveimported much larger quantities of SBT between 2011 and 2013.
In the combination of exporters’ records, Hong Kong SAR only reported higher annual SBT importin 2012 but recorded lower annual import for the other four years (Table 18).
Table 18. Hong Kong SAR imported SBT (kg), 2011-2014

Information sources: Hong Kong SAR CSD, Japan Customs, Australia Customs and New Zealand Customs

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

18

Side issue
Although the data recorded in UN Comtrade were reported by corresponding countries/
territories, these data were not always matched with the trade records kept by Customs and/or
Statistics Department in the relevant countries.
The annual exports of SBT from Australia recorded in UN Comtrade were higher than data
kept by Australian Customs between 2011 and 2015 (Table 18). However, the trade trend was thesame from 2011 to 2015. The export volume decreased from 2011 to 2014, followed by a sharp
increase in 2015. The Australian authority considers changes in the harmonized codes might
be a reason for this, but cannot confirm if that is the case (Andrea Bath from Department ofAgriculture and Water Resources in litt. to TRAFFIC, July 20th, 2016)8 .
The trade pattern for New Zealand between Customs data and UN Comtrade data also showedsome differences in volumes (Tables 18). Both datasets recorded New Zealand exported SBT to
Hong Kong SAR only in 2012 and 2013, and not for the other three years. The annual export
volume in 2012 was slightly higher than the volume in 2013 (Table 18). The records kept in UN
Comtrade for Japan matched with data kept by Japan Customs (Table 18).
In addition to Indonesia, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand, UN Comtrade also recorded six
other countries, including mainland China, Yemen, India, Turkey, Singapore and Spain, which(re)exported 19–50,582 kg SBT to Hong Kong SAR (Table 19). Based on UN Comtrade partners’
records, mainland China was the largest supplier for Hong Kong SAR’s SBT import between 2011
and 2015, accounting for 55% of Hong Kong SAR total SBT import. Both Hong Kong SAR CSD and
UN Comtrade did not record any SBT re-exported from Hong Kong SAR.
Table 19. UN Comtrade recorded SBT (re)exports to Hong Kong SAR (kg), 2011-2015

Note: *- Hong Kong SAR CSD did not record imports from these countries.
8

Department of Agriculture and Water Resources suspects Customs codes changes could be a reason.

19

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

Percentage of SBT retention in Hong Kong SAR
YFT and BFT were the most retained sashimi tuna species in Hong Kong SAR. The annual
retention percentages were 30–54% and 43–64% for BFT and YFT, respectively in Hong Kong SAR
between 2011 and 2015. BET accounted for 3–8% of annual sashimi tuna retention in Hong Kong
SAR.
According to the Hong Kong SAR CSD records, SBT usually accounted for 0.02–0.08% of annual
sashimi tuna retention but accounted for 3% in 2012—as a result of high SBT imports in 2012
(Table 20). If considering the SBT trade volume reported by trade partners, the actual volume
and percentage of SBT retention in Hong Kong SAR would increase, especially for 2011 and 2013
(Tables 15 and 20).
Table 20. Percentage of sashimi tuna retention in Hong Kong SAR, 2011-2015

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

20

Marked and labelled Southern Bluefin Tunas Thunnus maccoyii. Tokyo fishmarket Japan © Michael Sutton /WWF

21

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

Sashimi tuna market
According to dianping.com there was a total of 3,287 and 1,738 Japanese-style restaurants inShanghai and Beijing, respectively, in early 2016. In general, Japanese-style restaurants in thesetwo cities can be categorized into four types of food offered: ordinary restaurants, sushi buffets, setmeal and specialized restaurants (e.g. Japanese-style noodle restaurants or Japanese-style barbecue
restaurants). All four types of Japanese-style restaurants were included for sampling, except someof those specialized restaurants that did not offer any sashimi/sushi dishes. Almost all visitedrestaurants offered sashimi/sushi at different price options, however only a small number of those
provided more than one kind of tuna selection. BFT or SBT were ordered and purchased if there
was more than one tuna selection. The price of sashimi dishes not only depends on the quality ofthe tuna but also on the class/degree of the restaurants. Some restaurants only offered a fixed large
portion of dishes, and smaller sizes of dishes were not available. Other restaurants did not have atake-out service for sashimi. Thus, no tuna was obtained from these restaurants.
Six restaurants that offered SBT in the 2012 study were no longer in business. Thirteen
restaurants (one in Beijing and 12 in Shanghai) that offered SBT in the 2012 study were revisited
for sashimi tuna sample collection in early 2016. The DNA test showed that only three out of therevisited 13 restaurants (all in Shanghai) were found serving SBT in the 2016 survey.
Most (36%, 72) of the sashimi tuna on offer for sale, and therefore collected from restaurants, werein the CNY 101–200 restaurant price category (Table 21). Only around 7% (14) of sashimi tuna wascollected from restaurants in the lowest restaurant price category (≤ CNY 100) (Table 21). However,more than half of the samples were purchased at low prices, up to CNY 100 (53%, 105). Only 5%(10) of sashimi tuna samples were purchased at prices above CNY 300.
This indicated that customers tend not to order sashimi tuna at the low price category restaurants(according to average cost price per person, as listed on dianping.com) since a portion of sashimi
tuna was small and not enough for a meal.
Table 21. The number of sashimi tuna samples found in different purchased as well as
restaurant price categories (as listed on dainping.com)

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

22

Only two SBT samples were collected from restaurants at the low cost class up to CNY 100 (Table
22). Twenty SBT samples were purchased at equal to or less than CNY 100. All SBT samples werepurchased at prices equal to or less than CNY 300.
Table 22. The number of identified SBT samples in different purchased as well as restaurant
price categories (as listed on dainping.com)

Based on the survey information, 50 restaurants in Shanghai claimed to have sourced their tunafrom Japan. It was similar in Beijing, where 54 restaurants claimed that their tuna was imported
from Japan. Only four restaurants in Shanghai and five in Beijing, stated their tuna was sourced
in mainland China. Two restaurants in Shanghai and nine in Beijing said their tuna was sourced
from different oceans, such as the Atlantic, Pacific, South Pacific, Indian Ocean and Mediterranean
Sea. It was not clear if those fish were imported or harvested by Chinese vessels. Canada, Chile,
Indonesia, India, Norway, New Zealand, Spain, Taiwan, USA were also mentioned by at least oneof the restaurants as the source of purchased sashimi tuna. Australia was not mentioned in either
Beijing or Shanghai. Eighteen restaurants in Shanghai and 14 in Beijing did not know the source of
their sashimi tuna.

23

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

Claimed species vs confirmed species
In terms of the species specified by restaurants where sashimi tuna was collected during thisresearch, 64 restaurants in Shanghai did not specify the tuna species, 32 used the general term
bluefin tuna, one specified as BET and another as SBT. The remaining two in Shanghai did notprovide any name of the tuna. In Beijing, 51 restaurants said the purchased samples were tuna, 41
claimed those as BFT, five specified as BFT, one said SBT. Two restaurants in Beijing claimed thetuna sampled were “red tuna” (Table 23).
In Shanghai and Beijing, only one restaurant in each city claimed the purchased samples were
SBT (Tables 23 and 24). The DNA test confirmed that the restaurant in Shanghai claiming to sell
SBT was accurate, whereas the one in Beijing proved actually to be BET (Table 23). However, therestaurant in Shanghai claimed the SBT was sourced from the Mediterranean. It was not clear if
this means the SBT was also imported from Mediterranean countries.
Table 23. Comparison of DNA identified with claimed tuna species in Shanghai

Table 24. Comparison of DNA identified with claimed tuna species in Beijing

Based on the DNA testing of 199 collected sashimi samples, 26 were identified as SBT. This is muchless (13%) compared to similar research in 2011–2012 (26% out of a total sample size of 100, or 30%
out of 88 Thunnus spp. samples) (Anon., 2012). Only one confirmed SBT sample was collected in
Beijing and the rest (25) were collected in Shanghai (Tables 23 and 24). BET (35) and SBT (25) were
the tuna species mostly found in the samples collected in Shanghai, followed by PBT (18) and ABT(17) (Table 23). YFT was the least found species from samples collected in Shanghai. On the other

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

24

hand, in Beijing, PBT (37) and BET (35) were the species found most from the collected samples,
followed by ABT (17), YFT (9) and SBT (1) (Table 24).
The DNA tests showed that the two samples from Beijing which were claimed to be “red tuna” wereactually BET and YFT (Table 24). In total, 18 restaurants in Shanghai and 40 restaurants in Beijing
provided more specific and accurate species information (Tables 23 and 24).
Compared with the percentage of SBT retention in mainland China, 0.11% in 2014 and 0.61% in2015 (Table 14), the SBT findings from collected samples in Beijing and Shanghai (13% in total)
seems high. Given the limited sample size, one has to be cautious in extrapolating the DNA test
findings from these two cities to the presence of SBT in the wider Chinese market. In addition,
only one restaurant in Shanghai and one in Beijing claimed and labeled the tuna actually as SBT.
SBT did not seem to be a preferred tuna species in the sashimi market in mainland China, evenin Shanghai. When comparing the number of SBT findings in Beijing (1) and Shanghai (25), it ispossible to conclude that SBT sashimi tuna tends to be more concentrated and available only ina small number of cities in mainland China and it might not be evenly widespread throughout
mainland China.
A Chi-square test9 with a p-value of 5.236 *10-6 showed that tuna species found in Beijing andShanghai were different (Table 25). This indicates that the frequency of tuna species composition
found in mainland China might vary across locations.
Table 25. The number of different tuna species found in Beijing and Shanghai

Note: Chi-square test p-value = 5.236 *10-6

A Chi-square test with a p-value of 0.00014 showed that tuna species found in the first and second
runs of samples collected in Beijing were different (Table 26). However, this was not the case for
Shanghai. This indicated tuna species found in Beijing might have a seasonal difference, such as
before and after Chinese New Year. It is not clear if there were other possible seasonal difference indifferent times of a year.

9

Chi-square test is a statistical test, used to determine whether there is a significant difference between the expected frequencies and theobserved frequencies in one or more categories.

25

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

Table 26. Number of tuna species found in different runs of sample collection in Beijing andShanghaiNote: Chi-square test p-values were 0.00014 for Beijing, 0.25004 for Shanghai

The restaurants of different average cost were categorized as low (equal or less than CNY 200),
medium (CNY 201–400) and high-price categories (>CNY 400) (Table 27). A Chi-square test, withp-value (3.44*10-9) smaller than 0.05, indicated that tuna species distribution was different between
the various price category of restaurants. Most of the YFT (79%) and BET (59%) were found in
low-price category restaurants, on the other hand, most of the PBT (50%) was found at high-pricecategory restaurants. Around 58% of SBT was found at mid-price category restaurants and only 8%of SBT was found at the high-price category restaurants.
Table 27. Sashimi tuna species found in different price categories of restaurants

The smallest available portion of tuna sashimi was ordered in each restaurant for sample collection,
and around 16.8 kg of tuna sashimi were purchased from 199 restaurants. SBT samples added up toaround 2 kg, accounting for 12% of the total weight of purchased tuna sashimi samples.

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

26

27

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
Trade data gaps between countries and/or territories are not necessarily caused by illegal trade,other reasons can also play a role, including recording policies (for example Japan does not record
shipments smaller than JPY 200,000 (USD 2,123) in value), categories of commodity detail,document and data management, as well as cross year shipments. Increasing the consistency indata recording policies, commodity categories and the quality of data management among different
countries/territories and international bodies will help to reduce these trade data gaps. Higher
consistency in overall data recording will also help to identify illegal trade.
The sashimi tuna sampling in Beijing and Shanghai was conducted in early 2016 (in January andMarch). Thus, the sashimi tuna retention for mainland China in 2015 would be the best data
reference. However, the catch data recorded by RFMOs for 2015 were not yet available and theretention volume in 2015 cannot yet be estimated. The retention percentage of sashimi tuna formainland China was relatively stable for YFT and BET from 2011 to 2013, but changed largely in2014. The retention percentage for BFT and SBT increased largely from 2013 to 2014, although
the actual estimated retention volume for SBT remained stable for 2014 and 2015. Thus, it isinappropriate to use the sashimi tuna retention percentage in 2014 to compare and justify themarket sampling findings in 2016.
It is reasonable to use the estimated retention percentage of SBT as a reference to compare withthe market survey findings. Considering the large difference in SBT percentages between theestimated retention (<1%) and market survey finding (13%), there is cause for concern that there
could be some amount of illegally acquired SBT, via trade and/or fisheries, available in the sashimi
tuna market in mainland China. It is also worth considering the lack of clarity if all retained
fresh and frozen YFT were used for sashimi tuna consumption in mainland China. Other factors,
such as location, time of year and restaurant category may influence the relative presence of tuna
specimens in the markets of mainland China. The tuna species composition might be different indifferent cities in mainland China, at different times of year and from different price categories ofrestaurants. The current data are not yet sufficient for estimating the level of any illegally acquired
SBT in mainland China. Caution should be taken when explaining the difference in the percentageof tuna species composition between estimated retention and research findings from market
sampling. Further research is needed to estimate SBT consumption in mainland China.
SBT was classified as Critically Endangered on the IUCN Red List in 201110. The species is not listed
in the Appendices to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna
and Flora (CITES), and with mainland China being a NCNM to CCSBT there is currently no
specific international controls on regulating the import and (re)export of SBT, except some general
trade requirements, such as volume and value declaration, import tariff and quarantine regulation.
There is an uncertain regulatory agency responsibility for SBT in mainland China, suggesting it
may be necessary to follow this up with China’s Bureau of Fisheries Management in the future.
Other metropolitan cities in mainland China also have sashimi tuna consumption. According to
the information on dianping.com surveyed on 20 September 2016, Shanghai (3,567), Guangzhou(2,042) and Beijing (1,770) are the three cities with the largest number of Japanese-style restaurants.
The availability of sashimi tuna offered for sale via e-commerce platforms also needs more
attention. Some sashimi tuna was offered for sale simply as “tuna”, without any distinctive species
or point-of-origin description, while BFT and SBT were found on at least two major business-toconsumer (B2C) e-commerce websites based in mainland China.

10

http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/21858/0

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

28

RECOMMENDATIONS
Encourage all CCSBT Members and CNMs to report their annual SBT catch to FAO tokeep accurate and up to date information in the database.
Encourage Australia and New Zealand to check with UN Comtrade on their trade data
records for better consistency.
Encourage countries/territories to change their Customs HS CODES as soon as possible
to follow World Customs Organization (WCO) recommendations for better comparison
between importers and exporters.
Encourage countries/territories to make Customs trade data publically accessible (e.g.
online) or, at least to provide data upon request, without charge.
Encourage Japan to confirm all sashimi tuna trade volumes with mainland China andHong Kong SAR to eliminate any possible illegal trade.
Encourage Japan to record all values of import and export, including those equal orunder JPY 200,000 in value, and report all recorded trade to UN Comtrade for a better
estimation of global trade.
There are likely to be other places in mainland China with high sashimi tuna
consumption, e.g. Guangzhou. Therefore, more sampling in these centres for DNA testingis necessary to understand better sashimi tuna species composition across mainland
China.

29

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

REFERENCES
Anon. (2012). Market survey in the People’s Republic of China in 2011-2012 (sashimi-grade tuna).
WWF study.
Davies, C., Farley, J., Hill, P., Lansdell, M. and Grewe, P. (2016). Genetic species identification – SBT
market presence in China. CSIRO.

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

30

31

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

ANNEX
Annex 1. List of Customs code for sashimi tuna in different countries/territories, 2011-2015

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

32

33

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

Annex 2. Southern Bluefin Tuna catch volume (t), CCSBT 2001-2014.

Information source: CCSBT catch data

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

34

Annex 3. Mainland China sashimi tuna trade (kg, USD), 2011-2015

Information source: mainland China Customs; UN Comtrade for mainland China.
Figures in brackets are value (USD)35

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

Annex 4. Hong Kong SAR sashimi tuna trade (kg, USD), 2011-2015

Information source: Hong Kong SAR CSD; UN Comtrade for Hong Kong SAR.
Figures in brackets are value (USD)
Hong Kong SAR CSD value data recorded in HKD, and converted to USD based on annual exchange rates.
TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

36

Annex 5. Tuna species identified in the restaurants in Beijing, 2016

Source: Map data © 2017 Google

Annex 6. Tuna species identified in the restaurants in Shanghai, 2016

Source: Map data © 2017 Google37

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

TRAFFIC report: The Southern Bluefin Tuna market in China

38

JUNE 2017

TRAFFIC, the wildlife trade monitoring network, is theleading non-governmental organization working globallyon trade in wild animals and plants in the context of bothbiodiversity conservation and sustainable development.
For further information contact:
TRAFFIC
East Asia Regional Officec/o WWF Hong Kong
15/F, Manhattan Centre,
8 Kwai Cheong Road.
Kwai Chung N.T. Hong Kong, SAR
Telephone: (852) 2161 9686
Fax: (852) 2845 2764
Website: http://www.traffic.org

UK Registered Charity No. 1076722
Registered Limited Company No. 3785518