Wild fish and other aquatic organisms as feed in aquaculture in Africa and the Near East 143
many African countries exceeds the demand for fish (Hecht, 2006). Moreover, industry
inefficiencies such as those that occurred in Morocco (Atmani, 2003) and most likely
in several other countries, also need to be considered. Where such inefficiencies exist,
it is better to reduce the fish to fishmeal than to write them it off as a post-harvest
loss. This point is clearly illustrated by Naji (2003), who noted that each kilogram of
fish exported from Morocco, in whatever form, generates sufficient foreign revenue
to allow for the importation of 3.92 kg of staple foods. However, despite this fact,
Naji (2003) recommends that fish resources would be better directed towards human
consumption than for inclusion in animal feeds.
The use of the pelagic resource is, however, largely driven by market forces. For
example, Namibia has significant horse mackerel resources, yet only 10 percent of the
catch is reduced to fishmeal, while the bulk is exported to other countries in Africa
as a frozen product for human consumption (Van Zyl, 2001). The reason for this is
that there is little demand for fresh or frozen horse mackerel on the local market and
export profit margins are higher than those for fishmeal. Similarly, the processing of
the pelagic catch in South Africa is also entirely market driven, which, in essence, is no
different from the use of the “dagaa” resource in Kenya, although it does not have the
same social consequences. This implies that if small pelagic fish are to make a greater
contribution to food security, then this can only be achieved through legislation. This
in turn would be against free market principles to which many African countries are
now committed, either by choice and/or by international design.
The FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (FAO, 1995) advocates
that: “States should encourage the use of fish for human consumption and promote
consumption of fish whenever appropriate...” and countries should discourage the
use of fish for feeding animals when it is fit for human consumption (FAO, 1995).
While governments no doubt recognize and promote the principles of the code, it is
often not possible to give effect to the required practicalities due to inadequate local
infrastructure. Thorpe et al. (2004) on reviewing the Poverty Reduction Strategy
Papers of African countries (these documents remain one of the main conditions for
concessional lending to developing countries by the International Monetary Fund and
World Bank), suggest that “... most [but not all] African governments generally do not
regard fisheries as one of the sectors that could assist in the achievement of national
food security and the reduction of poverty”. As such, the reduction of edible fish to
fishmeal does not appear to have been identified as a problem in many countries. Food
security is a serious problem in many African countries. For example, in Ghana where
25 percent of children below five years of age are undernourished (Kurien, 2003),
as much as 50 percent of the anchovy catch is reduced to fishmeal (Directorate of
Fisheries, Ghana, 2003). However, the possible benefits of redirecting a portion of the
anchovy catch for direct human consumption are not mentioned in the Post Harvest
Fisheries Review prepared by the Directorate of Fisheries, Ghana (2003).
In summary, there appears to be a dichotomy with respect to the use of small-pelagics
in the region. In some countries (e.g. Kenya and Morocco), the small pelagic catch is
reduced to fishmeal, even though the fish would have been absorbed by local markets
for direct human consumption had they been available. That there is a need for more fish
to improve food security is unquestioned. Per capita fish consumption in sub-Saharan
Africa fell from 9 to 7 kg (i.e. 22 percent) between 1990 and 1997, due to dwindling fish
stocks and increased competition with fish exports (Teutscher, 2000). Similarly, Hecht
(2006) reports a decline of 2.1 kg per capita in sub-Saharan Africa for the period 1980
to 2002. Conversely, in other countries (e.g. Nambia and South Africa) the variable
use of the small pelagic catch is largely determined by demand and, therefore, the
catch appears to be used for optimal economic and social benefits. Unfortunately, the
paucity of data on the use of small pelagic fish in Africa and the Near East precludes
a more detailed analysis and prognosis. This can only be achieved if local authorities