Foro Global sobre Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutrición (Foro FSN)

Consultas

Consulta del HLPE sobre el borrador cero del Informe: El papel de la pesca y la acuicultura sostenible en la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición

En noviembre de 2012, el Comité de Seguridad Alimentaria Mundial (CFS) de la ONU pidió al Grupo de Alto Nivel de Expertos en Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutrición (HLPE, por sus siglas en inglés) llevar a cabo un estudio sobre El papel de la pesca y la acuicultura sostenibles para la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición. Teniendo en cuenta los resultados de la consulta para definir el alcance, el HLPE tiene la intención de evaluar la importancia y relevancia de la pesca y la acuicultura para la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición, así como los desafíos actuales a los que se enfrentan la pesca y la acuicultura en relación con la seguridad alimentaria, apuntando a los cambios que se están produciendo, entre los que se incluyen la sobreexplotación de los recursos pesqueros y el auge de la acuicultura, con el fin de comprender mejor estos cambios y maximizar sus efectos positivos.

Los resultados finales del estudio se incorporarán a la 41ª Sesión plenaria del CFS sobre la convergencia de políticas (octubre de 2014).

Como parte del proceso de elaboración de sus informes, el HLPE busca ahora aportaciones, sugerencias y comentarios sobre el presente proyecto de borrador cero.

Esta consulta electrónica será utilizada por el HLPE para continuar elaborando el informe, que será entonces sometido a revisión por expertos externos, antes de su finalización y aprobación por el Comité Directivo del HLPE.

Los borradores cero del HLPE se presentan deliberadamente -con su abanico de imperfecciones- lo suficientemente temprano en el proceso y en una etapa de trabajo en curso, cuando queda tiempo suficiente para dar información adecuada de consideración, de forma que pueda ser realmente útil y jugar un papel real en la elaboración del informe. Es una parte fundamental del diálogo científico entre el Equipo de Proyecto y el Comité Directivo del HLPE con el resto de la comunidad del conocimiento.

En particular, el HLPE desearía recibir observaciones y sugerencias basadas en pruebas, referencias, ejemplos, etc en los aspectos de políticas, desde una perspectiva basada en la evidencia, sobre lo que puede hacerse para mejorar la contribución de la pesca y la acuicultura para mejorar la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición, ahora y en el futuro, en diversos contextos.

Es un hecho: el pescado es rico a nivel nutricional (en especial en calcio biodisponible, hierro, zinc y vitamina A), y el pescado (ya sea producido por la acuicultura o capturado en poblaciones silvestres mediante la pesca) se utiliza en muchos países en desarrollo como principal fuente de proteína animal. La estimación más reciente de la FAO indica por ejemplo que en 2009, el pescado representó el 17% del consumo de proteína animal de la población mundial y un 6,5 % del total de las proteínas consumidas. A nivel mundial, el pescado proporciona a alrededor de 3 000 millones de personas casi el 20 por ciento del aporte medio per cápita de proteínas animales, y a 4 300 millones de personas con cerca del 15 por ciento de dicha proteína (FAO 2012).

Sin embargo, la pesca y la acuicultura están ausentes de la mayoría de los informes mundiales sobre alimentación e inseguridad alimentaria (por ejemplo, el informe SOFA de la FAO y los informes sobre la inseguridad alimentaria) y, con algunas pocas excepciones, el pescado ha sido ignorado hasta ahora en el debate internacional sobre la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición. Al mismo tiempo, aunque la literatura pesquera reconoce la importancia del pescado en relación con la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición, el análisis pasa rara vez más allá del simple dicho que dice: “El pescado es un alimento rico para los pobres".

Hay una necesidad urgente de ir más allá de este refrán y establecer con mayor rigor la relación entre seguridad alimentaria y nutrición. La pregunta clave que este estudio tendrá como objetivo abordar es: “reconociendo la importancia claramente aceptada del pescado para la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición, ¿qué debe hacerse para mantener, o incluso mejorar esta contribución, ahora y a largo plazo, teniendo en cuenta los desafíos a los que se enfrentan tanto la pesca como la acuicultura en términos de su propia sostenibilidad medioambiental y gobernanza, y las transiciones económicas y demográficas externas a las que tiene que responder? "

A fin de abordar esta cuestión global, existen varios interrogantes más específicos que pueden ser considerados:

Contribución respectiva de la pesca y la acuicultura a la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición: ¿Cómo y en qué medida contribuyen la pesca y la acuicultura a la seguridad alimentaria? ¿A través de qué vías de impacto? ¿De qué evidencia disponemos para presentar la pesca y la acuicultura como vías clave para mejorar la seguridad alimentaria de las poblaciones objetivo?

Mujeres y seguridad alimentaria: ¿Cuál es el papel específico de la mujer en la mejora de la seguridad alimentaria en el sector pesquero y acuícola? ¿Cuáles son las amenazas y obstáculos para esta función específica y por qué y cómo debería reforzarse este papel?

Compensaciones sectoriales y seguridad alimentaria: ¿Existe un intercambio entre las contribuciones de los sectores en diferentes niveles o entre los diferentes grupos? En otras palabras, ¿es posible que mejorando la seguridad alimentaria en un nivel (o en un grupo objetivo específico, por ejemplo, los consumidores urbanos) se reduzca la seguridad alimentaria en otro nivel (o en otro grupo específico, por ejemplo, los pescadores/productores)? Como parte de esta cuestión, ¿cuál es la contribución general del comercio pesquero internacional en la seguridad alimentaria?

Sostenibilidad ambiental de la pesca y acuicultura: Más allá de la obvia dependencia a largo plazo, ¿cuál es la relación (intercambios, sinergias) entre la conservación de los recursos y la seguridad alimentaria? En particular, ¿cuáles son los efectos a corto y medio plazo de la gran cantidad de intervenciones de conservación (por ej. áreas marinas protegidas) que se han establecido recientemente, en las poblaciones locales que dependen de la pesca artesanal?

Gobernabilidad y seguridad alimentaria: ¿Cuáles son los efectos de las diversas reformas de la gestión y la gobernanza (por ejemplo, los programas de cogestión) actualmente implementados a nivel nacional en las pesquerías de todo el mundo, sobre seguridad alimentaria? A nivel internacional, ¿cuál es el papel y el impacto de los programas y campañas mundiales recientes como el "Plan de Acción Internacional para prevenir, desalentar y eliminar la pesca ilegal, no declarada y no reglamentada (PAI- INDNR) ", o la implementación de BMPs (Mejores Prácticas de Gestión, por sus siglas en inglés) en la acuicultura para la seguridad alimentaria?

Interacción entre pesca y acuicultura: ¿Hay intercambios entre la acuicultura y la pesca en relación con la seguridad alimentaria? En particular, ¿es el uso de harina de pescado (para alimentar a los peces de criadero) una amenaza a la seguridad alimentaria humana?

El futuro de la pesca y la acuicultura en el contexto de la seguridad alimentaria: ¿Qué papel futuro serán capaces de jugar la pesca y la acuicultura en el contexto de los efectos combinados de la transición demográfica (aumento de la población y aumento de nivel de vida) y el cambio climático (probable disminución de la capacidad de producción agrícola mundial)?

Agradecemos de antemano a todos los colaboradores por su amabilidad al leer y comentar esta primera versión de nuestro informe. Esperamos contar con una consulta rica y fructífera.

El Equipo de Proyecto y el Comité Directivo del HLPE

Esta actividad ya ha concluido. Por favor, póngase en contacto con [email protected] para mayor información.

*Pinche sobre el nombre para leer todos los comentarios publicados por ese miembro y contactarle directamente
  • Leer 64 contribuciones
  • Ampliar todo

Sue Longley

IUF/UITA
Switzerland

This comment is submitted on behalf of the IUF*, the global trade union federation representing workers throughout the food chain including in the fishing, aquaculture and fish processing industries.

The IUF welcomes the decision of the CFS to ask the HLPE to conduct a study on The Role of Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture for food security and nutrition.

The IUF believes that decent working conditions in the fishing and aquaculture sectors are essential both to the sustainability of these industries and to ensuring the food security of people working in fisheries and aquaculture.

We take this opportunity to remind the HLPE of the recognition in the CFS’s Global Strategic Framework (paragraph 34), that “Many agricultural and food workers (note: which we understand to include fish and aquaculture workers) and their families suffer from hunger and malnutrition because basic labor laws, minimum wage policies and social security systems do not cover rural workers. Formal employment and the assurance of a minimum living wage is key for workers’ food security and nutrition.”

The GSF calls for living wages and decent work as key tools to ensuring global food security and nutrition for agricultural workers.

We would also like to draw to the attention of the HLPE to the “points of consensus” arising out of the ILO’s global dialogue forum for the promotion of the Work in Fishing Convention, 2007 (no 188),

(http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_dialogue/---sector/documents/meetingdocument/wcms_214603.pdf), in particular to Point 4: Recommendations for future actions  by the International Labour Organization  and its Members, point (vi) which calls on ILO and its member states to “continue to expand strategic partnerships with other UN agencies and International organizations to foster policy and programme coherence in the fishing sector to promote the ratification and effective implementation of Convention No. 188.”

The IUF therefore calls on the HLPE to recognize the importance of ILO Convention 188, Work in Fishing Convention and to call on CFS members states to ratify and implement the Convention as a tool for ensuring both sustainable fishing/aquaculture and the right to food and nutrition for workers in the fishing industry.

We support the comments already submitted by our affiliated organization, UILA PESCA.

************

*The International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Associations (IUF) is an international federation of trade unions representing workers employed in agriculture and plantations; the preparation and manufacture of food and beverages; hotels, restaurants and catering services; all stages of tobacco processing.  The IUF is composed of 394 affiliated organizations in 126 countries representing a combined membership of around 2,6 million.

 

Niracha Wongchinda

Thailand
The project team has done a good work on the zero draft.
However there are some comments particularly on 7. Recommendations should cover these topics:
 
National fisheries policies as stipulated in various national strategies for fisheries and aquaculture development and management have emphasized on the following directions:
• To have fishers and involving local organizations participate in fisheries administration, management and development.
• To increase knowledge and skill of the fishers for their self-reliance and viable occupation as well as to increase their capability in managing of their organizations.
• To maintain fisheries resources in harmony with sustainable utilization and without compromising the impact to environment, under joint administration and management by people, community, local organization, and government.
• To increase production from aquaculture sufficiently for domestic consumption.
• To accelerate research in supporting commercial aquaculture for increasing trade volume, quality standard and reducing cost of production.
• To develop sustainable aquaculture system for domestic trade as well as for export based on COC and GAP principle.
• To control and regulate fishing operation in compliance with agreements with other coastal States or joint-venture partners.
 
Yours sincerely,
 
Niracha Wongchinda
Department of Fisheries, Bangkok, Thailand
 

Government of AustraliaMadeleine D'Arcy

Department of Agriculture
Australia

Australian contribution to the High Level Panel of Experts for Food Security and Nutrition (HLPE) report on The Role of Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture for Food Security and Nutrition

Australia considers that sustainable fisheries and aquaculture have the potential to improve livelihoods and promote food and nutritional security. Australia welcomes the zero draft HLPE report on The Role of Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture for Food Security and Nutrition.

Australia’s fisheries are managed sustainably and for optimum yield. The Australian Government develops and implements policies that promote a profitable, competitive and sustainable fishing industry while protecting and conserving our marine ecosystems and biodiversity.

Overall comments

Australia encourages greater balance and nuance throughout the HLPE report on The Role of Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture for Food Security and Nutrition.

Proper focus should be given to the benefits of open and transparent markets in the report.

The paper presents domestic and regional trade as an alternative to international trade, implying that there is competition between them. International trade is presented as a developed/developing country nexus when developing countries are the largest in terms of capture fish production and trade.

Aquaculture is a global, competitive industry and fish products are highly traded internationally. In many advanced economies, seafood imports will continue to be necessary to meet domestic demand in the foreseeable future. Meeting this demand through global trade is a significant opportunity.

Trade, including of fish and aquaculture products, can create commercial opportunities and investment, generating growth. It can also create employment, giving people higher and more stable incomes, and therefore greater access to food.

The content of the report is very focused on the role of sustainable fisheries and aquaculture for food security and nutrition in developing countries.  However, we do not feel the focus on developing countries is adequately expressed throughout the document. 

The paper should also provide balanced treatment of small-scale and large-scale operators and consider the consequences for food security of failing to develop appropriate sustainable domestic fisheries policies. 

Research related comments

Australia submits the following general research related matters for the HLPE’s consideration:

The question this paper seeks to address contains the premise that there is a link between the development of fisheries and aquaculture sectors and food security and nutrition. This premise should be critically examined. While there may be a link between poverty and food and nutrient deficiency, the paper does not present conclusive evidence that fish as a component of the diet is linked either to food and nutrient deficiency or to poverty. For example, page 28 states that fish provide 1% of the calorie intake of humans, and there are countries where fish does not constitute a significant part of peoples’ diet without leading to food or nutrient deficiency. Poverty has multiple causes and there may be commercial reasons why low-income food-deficient countries seek to develop their fisheries and aquaculture sectors. Applying a food security and nutrition lens to fisheries and aquaculture sector development can distort the complexity of these issues.

A better question could be ‘how can fish production in low-income food-deficient countries (LIFDCs) be maintained or increased now and in the long-term?’ An examination of this question could focus on issues such as market development, access agreements, trade barriers, equitable distribution of resources, infrastructure, value added processing, domestication and genetic improvement of fish stocks, efficiency of production, labour, and foreign exchange earnings. Most of these issues are touched on in the paper but do not get balanced treatment. The equitable distribution of resources is difficult to address but may be more relevant to poverty and food security.

The paper does not raise the role of subsidisation of fisheries effort which has been clearly identified internationally as major contributory factor in decreasing the sustainability of global fish stocks and in distorting production patterns in this sector.  The role of subsidies and potential approaches to reforming international policy in this area, and how this might have benefits in terms of sustainability of fisheries and increasing food security would be a worthwhile addition to the work carried out in connection with the production of this paper.

The paper could examine the negative food security impacts of poor fisheries management and fisheries policy. This could provide valuable background for international attempts to curb unstainable fishing.

From the perspective of Pacific fisheries, the body of the paper could be enhanced through greater consideration of small island developing states, most of which have significant marine resources; the significant threats to coastal fisheries from climate change and population growth; and the financial viability of small-scale fisheries.   

We also submit the following specific comments:

  • Page 9, line 41. Suggest deleting ‘and the negative impact that large-scale operations can have on smaller operators’. There is also the possibility for small-scale operators to have negative impacts on large-scale operators. The report states artisanal fishers catch approximately the same volume of fish for human consumption as commercial fisheries (page 53). Therefore artisanal fishers should be under equal levels of scrutiny as their large-scale counterparts to ensure long-term sustainability of fish stocks. The key focus of international fisheries is proper management of key stocks and ensuring that the right of people to fish is maintained, for small-scale and large-scale operations. The report should treat operators of all sizes with balance. 
  • Page 12, lines 16-30. Suggest rewording the final sentence (retaining appropriate references) to read: ‘In many countries, small-scale fisheries are an important, but underrated, source of employment, food security and income, particularly in the developing world and in rural areas.’
  • Page 53, lines 4-12. The final sentence reads: ‘The estimate shown in Fig 3.9 suggests than in that regard small-scale fisheries are far more determinant than large-scale operations with respect to food security.’  We query whether this statement is accurate as it may not account for indirect employment. Indirect employment is likely to be higher for large-scale operations due to employment in related fields such as canning, processing, trade and oil production.
  • Pages 52-55, ‘Economic efficiency’. Lines 11-15 on page 55 draw a conclusion about the relative amount of ‘attention, support and resources’ received by small-scale and large-scale fisheries. This conclusion does not appear to directly follow from the information presented. The narrative appears to relate to selected comparisons of costs but not whether these costs are supported by government intervention, investment or other sources. This section could be improved by broadening and deepening the analysis. It is important to consider whether the fisheries activity is economically viable and sustainable, particularly where fishers are in loss-making situations over sustained periods, yet continue to fish, supported by government intervention. Given the lack of clarity about the definition of ‘small-scale’ fishing, this section could also be improved by exploring possible impacts on various types of small-scale operations, including artisanal fishing/semi-subsistence fishing and the interaction with government domestic policies (which in turn have an impact on the international trade of fish). 

Specific comments on the recommendations of the paper

Recommendation 4

Lines 42-44 of recommendation 4 state that ‘where small-scale fisheries are in competition with larger-scale operations, governments should systematically establish national policies and regulations that discriminate positively these small-scale fisheries’.

This recommendation is not appropriate for all countries in all circumstances. Governments need to be able to implement policies and regulations that accommodate for a number of factors, not just providing benefit for small-scale fishing operations. Australia suggests rewording the recommendation to ‘Where small-scale fisheries are in competition with larger-scale operations, governments should give due consideration to all circumstances when implementing national policies and regulations as to not discriminate against either method.’

Recommendation 4 also calls for efforts to be made to ‘reform rapidly the way international fisheries and ocean governance is currently operating’. This statement is too broad, and not well substantiated by the evidence presented in the paper.

Recommendation 9

This recommendation is too simplistic about the positives and negatives of international fish trade. The suggestion that fish trade can cause malnutrition should be removed. Instead, the paper and its recommendations should recognise the negative outcomes that can occur where there are weaknesses or failures in the development of appropriate sustainable domestic fisheries policies and decisions by government which can then overflow and impact negatively onto world markets and international trade in fish.

Any additional guidelines, rules or procedures should not impose additional barriers to trade.

Regarding lines 32-35, the study should refer to the creation of parameters or rules for international trade and the role of governments in regulating to enforce them. This part of the recommendation should also reflect the role of the World Trade Organization.

Recommendation 10

This recommendation should be more balanced in regard to trade. It could call for improving fisheries governance everywhere to ensure increase sustainability.

Concluding comments

Australia thanks the HLPE for developing a zero draft of The Role of Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture for Food Security and Nutrition and is happy to engage with the HLPE to provide comment on future drafts.

James Rohan

Australia

As you might imagine, large topic and have put down some relevant ideas from existing research and am reflecting on ways to model cultural approaches.

Am submitting progress if any at deadline but am now cognisant of strategic issues of fisheries and food security. While offered personal growth, have included some ideas as to potential reframing of research and development.

Best Regards

James

Pat Heslop-Harrison

United States of America
I am making some brief comments on the zero draft consultation "The Role of Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture for Food Security and Nutrition, dated 18 November 2013.http://www.fao.org/fsnforum/cfs-hlpe/fisheries-and-aquaculture-V0
 
I am a geneticist with interests including improvement of agricultural species, food security and environmental sustainability. There are many important issues addressed in this document; as is stated, despite aquaculture having a 2,500 year history, modern research has been surprisingly limited.
 
As an overall comment, I felt that many of key statements in the report were unreferenced or referenced to weak and discursive reports rather than rigorous factual studies. This suggests a need for study, and at a number of points in the report, there should be a recommendation of research that is required.
 
I thought that the references and discussion of the importance of fish genetics was considerably under-represented in the report. Genetics could well have its own complete section, not just a subsection of 3.4. With respect to recommendation 12 of p. 81 line 39, can there be some precise consideration of the genetic features being looked for in species used for aquaculture? Disease again is mentioned, but the epidemiology of fish diseases, as well as their nature and control options, should be looked at in more detail, particularly in relationship to prophylatic controls (antibiotics etc) and having in place control measures and associated legistation.
 
There is an excellent consideration of the feeds used for fish from page 47. However, there is surprisingly limited consideration of the future feeds, where it is essential to change to more plant-based products. What is required? Why are current plant meals not universal? Will land-based crops or algal foods be more important? What should plant breeders be looking for in producing fish feed?
 
I felt a few points were underdiscssed at other points: food safety issues may be greater with fish, despite the number of preservation of approaches - drying, salting, cold-chain, processed ... Can reduce post-consumer waste - bones and offal used more efficiently ('co-products) and not discarded? Where is the profit and added value here? There is an excellent consideration of feed conversion figures - but I expect the pork figure has improved considerably since 1999. The report states "Fish oil, which cannot be readily replaced, is expected to continue to slowly increase": to me, this sounds rather like comments on whale oil 30 years ago. Both plant breeding and plant-oil processing can easily replace in a decadal timescale.
 
I think the report should include chapters on footprinting of various aquaculture systems: it is important to have both a carbon footprint and a water footprint for aquaculture, carried out in a rigorous and defendable way (unlike, say, the rediculous water 'use' figures for beef production which are widely cited). There could be a SWAT analysis of several areas: genetics, preservation, genetic resources, nutrition inputs and outputs. 
 
While the statements about little work on fish are in general true, it is by no means only the case: there are huge parallels with plant domestication, and already there are large genomics projects (stickleback; danio). The genomics revolution can quickly influence fish breeding, and the Canadian Salmon genomic DNA sequence is soon to be published, while that of tilapia is also nearly available. Genetics will be much quicker using these resources, and it should be noted somewhere that already, transgenic fish are already available for purchase, the only animal and vertebrate in this category (albeit for the tropical fish hobbyist).
 
The report is very valuable in emphasizing the importance and growth in aquaculture, and its contribution to both food security and human nutrition, and I hope will lead to increased amounts of appropriate research and the applications of that research.
 

Gabriel de Labra

Independent Consultant on Small Scale Fisheries and Aquaculture
Spain

El documento es sin duda un  instrumento muy valioso y necesario que ayudará a dar al colectivo de hombres y mujeres que trabajan en el sector de la pesca artesanal y de la acuicultura de pequeña escala, el reconocimiento que la sociedad les debe como productores y proveedores de un alimento de enorme importancia para el ser humano. Como ha sido reconocido y destacado por el relator de NNUU para el derecho a la alimentación, en su informe de agosto de 2012, “ la contribución aportada por el sector pesquero mundial al derecho a la alimentación y la seguridad alimentaria es fundamental y sin embargo se la suele subestimar. La mayoría de las estrategias destinadas a mejorar la seguridad alimentaria pasan por alto ese sector o solo se refieren a él de pasada. Hasta hace poco, no se ha prestado suficiente atención a la protección de los derechos de los pescadores y, más en general, las personas que dependen del sector pesquero”.

El documento resalta en su apartado 3.8 la importancia de la escala y la drástica diferencia que, en relación a la SAN, existe entre la pesca o la acuicultura industrial y la pesca o la acuicultura artesanal o de pequeña escala. Esta diferencia es fundamental remarcarla para cualquier análisis serio y, en mi opinión, no es posible hacer una valoración global o análisis comparativo de la pesca o la acuicultura sin añadir el epígrafe de su escala. Es decir, no se puede hablar de la acuicultura o de la pesca como un todo sin hacer la precisión de su escala ya que en función de ésta se trata de actividades totalmente distintas e incluso contrapuestas. Y dentro de la misma escala también conviene precisar con otro calificativo, como es el de “responsable” o “sostenible”.

Considerando el documento en general como un trabajo completo y muy bien realizado, quiero aportar modestamente un par de consideraciones.

Por una parte, creo que es necesario resaltar que el beneficio nutricional del pescado para la salud (ampliamente tratado en el apartado 3.2) se ve en muchos casos comprometido por las habituales deficiencias y carencias en medios y procedimientos de conservación y procesamiento, que es una constante en la mayoría de los países en desarrollo. Si se reconoce la importancia del pescado para la Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutricional de la población, debe reconocerse en las políticas públicas la necesidad de apoyar y mejorar los sistemas de conservación y procesamiento y crear las condiciones favorables para la mejora de estas condiciones: infraestructuras, formación, acceso a créditos, inspección sanitaria, etc. Es un derecho de la población en general, y no sólo de los productores y procesadores de pescado, tener acceso a los medios y los conocimientos necesarios para un adecuado desempeño de su trabajo.

Por otra parte me gustaría destacar que, en mi opinión, dentro de los aspectos de Gobernanza ampliamente tratados, con rigor y acierto, en el capítulo 5 (Governance, food security and nutrition), sería deseable incluir y hacer la debida referencia al concepto de Soberanía Alimentaria. Contando con múltiples ejemplos en todo el mundo que demuestran que las leyes del libre mercado (e incluso las políticas de ayuda de organismos multilaterales como el PMA) han sido la principal causa de abandono y pérdida de la capacidad de producción de alimentos entre los pequeños productores de múltiples países en desarrollo, la Soberanía Alimentaria prioriza las economías locales y los mercados locales y nacionales por encima de las leyes internacionales, reconociendo el papel y los derechos de los pequeños productores, y colocando la producción alimentaria, la distribución y el consumo sobre la base de la sustentabilidad ambiental, social y económica. La Soberanía Alimentaria propone nuevas relaciones sociales libres de opresión y desigualdades entre los hombres y mujeres, pueblos, grupos étnicos, clases sociales y generaciones y aboga porque los derechos de acceso y la gestión de la tierra, las aguas, las semillas, los recursos pesqueros y ganaderos y la biodiversidad, estén en manos de aquellos que producen los alimentos y debidamente protegidos de los que anteponen el beneficio económico a la seguridad alimentaria y nutricional de los pueblos. En el caso que nos ocupa, los pescadores artesanales y los acuicultores rurales deben, en aras de la Soberanía Alimentaria, ser reconocidos, protegidos y defendidos por sus gobiernos para garantizar así la Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutricional en sus respectivos territorios y países. 

Ministry of Fisheries and Coastal AffairsAnita Utheim Iversen

Ministry of Fisheries and Coastal Affairs

Comments on the V0 draft of the Report: The Role of Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture for Food Security and Nutrition

We would like to thank HLPE for this study regarding the role of fisheries and aquaculture for food security and nutrition. We think the draft covers many themes of crucial importance for achieving a sustainable development of food production from these sectors. It is an important topic that often is forgotten in discussion on global food security.

The focus of the report is mainly on the south-east part of the world where the problem of food security is by far the greatest. The report is quite extensive regarding fisheries, but has some shortcomings regarding aquaculture. We have full confidence that the HPLE will balance the two topics, but want to stress one important issue that has escaped the draft.

When discussing the role of aquaculture on food security the focus in the report is the comparison of farming herbivore/omnivore fish and carnivore fish. As this comparison is important, one must not forget that an alternative to fish farming is the production of meat from terrestrial animals. In this comparison lies the amount of resources needed to produce 1 kg food. Looking at the feed conversion rate, fish farming undoubtedly is the most effective production regardless of fish species. In this aspect aquaculture is a great contributor to global food security and nutrition.

As the report points out, it is an important aspect that fish farming of carnivore fish uses fishmeal and fish oil in the feed. However, the amount used has been drastically reduced during the last decades. This has been the focus of two reports by Nofima (the Norwegian food research institute): http://www.nofima.no/filearchive/rapport-52-2011.pdf and http://www.nofima.no/filearchive/rapport-53-2011_5.pdf.

Regarding environmental sustainability, it is important that the report is balanced. It is our experience that fish farming can be environmentally sustainable when the government has a long-term focus on the issue. Pollutants can challenge food safety, but Norwegian surveillance reveals that the amount of environmental toxins has been reduced both in farmed fish and wild fish.

We would like to highlight the importance of food safety which is only scarcely dealt with in the report. It is necessary  to address food safety properly when addressing food security and nutrition. Infections and malnutrition associated with these are responsible for a significant proportion of deaths among infants and children worldwide each year. Food borne infections can become a nutritional concern, e.g. infections causing diarrhea will interfere with the absorption of nutrients from food. It is also important to assess and manage the risk and benefits of fish consumption. Developing, maintaining and improving databases on nutrients and contaminants such as methyl mercury and dioxins in fish consumed in the different regions are important. The increase in international trade and cross-border transmission of infectious diseases makes food borne disease surveillance programs important, nationally and internationally, in the control of food borne diseases.

Finally, it would be useful if the report in one section could provide key statistics from the fisheries and aquaculture sector. This could be information on the number of employees, the amount of fish protein in diets, etc. It should cover both sectors at the global level and also split into regional overviews.

Jorge Lopez

Argentina

Estimados señores, señoras:

He leido el Borrador cero  del estudio  "The role of sustainable fisheries and aquaculture for food security and nutrition"  y  al respecto tengo los siguientes comentarios:

1) No veo en el texto el impacto de la variabilidad y cambio climático en la pesca y la acuicultura y sus consecuencias en la Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutricional. En la región centroamericana, estamos trabajando sobre el tema ya que tiene un gran significado sobre todo en las comunidades costeras dedicadas a estas actividades.

2) El texto señala muy acertadamente  los conflictos existentes entre la pesca artesanal (pequeña escala) - pesca industrial (gran escala) asi como entre la acuicultura y la pesca.  Pero ahí se queda y no trasciende de manera clara en el planteamiento de soluciones o de vias alternativas. En la región tenemos experiencias donde esos enfrentamientos fueron trabajados de manera  exitosa mediante espacios de concertación muy bien manejados.

3) En el año 2008 en Centroamérica se desarrolló un estudio bajo el título de "Impacto de la Pesca y la Acuicultura en la Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutricional a Nivel Familiar y Comunitario en Centroamérica" bajo la dirección y patrocinio de la ORGANIZACIÓN DEL SECTOR PESQUERO Y ACUÍCOLA DEL ISTMO CENTROAMERICANO (OSPESCA) y  EL PROGRAMA REGIONAL DE SEGURIDAD ALIMENTARIA Y NUTRICIONAL PARA CENTROAMÉRICA (PRESANCA), ambos organismos miembros del SISTEMA DE LA INTEGRACIÓN CENTROAMERICANA (SICA). Personalmente trabaje en el diseño de este proyecto.

Puedo enviarles el informe final, si fuera de su interes.

Jorge López

Shashi Kumar

Bangalore University
India

Respected Sir,

As the title itself indicates there is a close interrelationship between the food security and the sustainable aquaculture.  The increasing population along with the increased income of the people would definitely cause increased demand for food, particularly of the hygienic food in the developed and developing countries.  As such, the demand for overall agricultural produce is been increasing. 

Agriculture itself can’t provide the basic need to fulfill the consumerist attitude of ‘consumption of food’.  Because most of the developed countries are in shortage of food production as they have much concentrated on the manufacturing sector.  Nearly 60 percent of the developed countries area much bothering about the payment for import of food, which has been earned through the trading activity.  The economic devastation in one way or the other is very much linked with the food crisis.  Thus, both for developing and underdeveloped countries, the supply chain of food would be of great importance and an opportunity to reap the fruits of food crisis.

The improvement of aquaculture not only promises to feed the hungry mouth, but also promotes the nutrients for better health practices.  Aqua-industry is an immense prospective for growth of economy, if it been harvested, maintained and marketed properly.  It would be of great potential of generation of employment too.  Concerned Governments should take initiative to explicit the policies and programmes related to the aquaculture, thereby providing subsidies, training, marketing, transport, warehousing etc., to improve the sustainability of fishing activity.  As such, the sustainable attitude with respect to the aquaculture results in emphasizing employment, generation of income and overall development of socio-economic aspects of a nation.

 

Thanking you.

Sincerely yours,

Dr. R. SHASHI KUMAR M.A., M.Phil., Ph.D.

Associate Professor

Principal Researcher: India-EU Trade and Investment Relations(UGC, New Delhi)

Project Director: Inclusive Growth in India (ICSSR, New Delhi)

Department of Economics

Bangalore University

Bangalore-560 056

Karnataka State, India

 

Government of New ZealandRenata Mirulla

Dear all

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft HLPE paper concerning the role of sustainable fisheries and aquaculture for food security and nutrition. 

Please find attached some comments on the draft. 

Kind regards,

Ingrid

Ingrid O'Sullivan| Senior International Adviser, International Fisheries Management

International | Policy

Ministry for Primary Industries | Pastoral House 25 The Terrace | PO Box 2526 | Wellington | New Zealand

www.mpi.govt.nz