As a key measure to raise transparency within small-scale and artisanal fisheries, a robust registration and licensing system needs to be put in place. It is advised to introduce mobile, and if possible, community-led, on-site licensing initiatives, providing immediate support for licensing with registered tax numbers. This enhances the accessibility of the licensing process and compliance among fishers, due to a sense of community ownership. In cooperation with a dedicated governmental body, such as the Department of Fisheries and the local research institute, a digital management system should be developed. This central database helps to monitor licenses and registrations from multiple locations and thus enables conclusions to be drawn about the status of fish populations.

Controls and inspections are key principles of curbing IUU fishing. Improving the quality of patrols through specialized training for inspectors is essential to monitor fishing activities directly on board or after landing. Additionally, processors are encouraged to conduct self-inspections to prevent the processing of undersized fish and enforcing regulations in their businesses, thereby reducing reputational risks in the industry. The development and / or revision of standard operating procedures for these controls ensures that they remain relevant and effective in the face of changing IUU fishing practices.

In tandem with the technical measures, building cooperative and community-based management structures has proven to be very successful. Such communities establish rules and regulations for accepted fishing methods but also facilitate stakeholder engagement to encourage local fisherfolk and associations to participate actively in fisheries management. Training programmes for the management structures focusing on organizational and technical capabilities are essential, equipping beneficiaries with the necessary skills to sustainably manage their waterbodies. In certain regions, the approach has included restructuring local management systems into cooperatives. This ensures that they have legal status and a well-defined management plan, thereby validating their operations. It also improves their ability to manage resources and increases their access to financial support through various funding opportunities.

Sensitization of stakeholders and the general public is another major activity in the context of combating IUU fishing. Information campaigns, such as videos explaining data collection at landings and the role of inspectors, contribute to raising awareness about the importance of sustainable fishing practices and the dangers of IUU fishing. These campaigns can be spread through national television, social media platforms or radio programmes to reach a wide audience and foster compliance and accountability. Public engagement initiatives, like consultation workshops, are essential for disseminating information on licensing, legislation, and the consequences of non-compliance. Especially focus group discussions further strengthen a sense of responsibility among fishers. Key factors for success include integrating local knowledge, establishing clear and enforceable regulations, and raising awareness of the consequences of compliance (sustainable fish stocks) and non-compliance (penalties).

Potential risks such as resistance to change, insufficient funding, and the complexity of monitoring vast and remote fishing areas need to be continually addressed through adaptive management and stakeholder collaboration.

Measuring the initial state of fish stocks and regulations will likely highlight imbalances between fish availability and the licensing landscape. Low proportions of legally operating fishers emphasize the need for training to encourage legal fishing practices. The training content includes information on harmful fishing practices, such as the use of fine-meshed mosquito nets or poison. Additionally, the benefits of fisheries management are explained, which promotes the long-term stabilization of fish populations through sustainable fishing methods. To address the causes of IUU fishing, the training should consider the viewpoints and perspectives of fishers, as IUU practices in artisanal fishing often result from a lack of access to appropriate gear: what is needed to resort to legal fishing? This might include adapted regulations or the availability of appropriate fishing gear.

Establishment of multi-stakeholder platforms (MSP)

Addressing IUU practices in artisanal fishing requires a coordinated approach between different stakeholders involved in the fishing sector and includes a variety of strategies and actions. The foundation of this approach is the establishment of multi-stakeholder platforms (MSP) that bring together government institutions, the private sector and civil society to collaborate and develop a legal framework for sustainable fisheries management. This also includes fisherfolk and community members, particularly women. Regarding marine fisheries, the importance of trans-regional dialogue and agreements must be taken into account, due to the interconnected nature of the marine environment. MSPs encourage an integrated approach to governance, as they ensure all kinds of perspectives are considered and that the management strategies are effective and beneficial to all involved. Regular meetings of the MSPs reinforce the exchange among the various actors.

Baseline data

The next step is the collection and management of accurate baseline data, which is crucial for understanding the extent of the issue and for monitoring progress. As local research institutes may already assess data on catch and stock estimations, their role is vital for sustainable management of fish resources. However, they are often underequipped, understaffed and need initial capacity building and investments. Supporting these institutions with technical equipment and methodological training will also provide better and more transparent catch assessments during and after the project implementations. During this first phase, recognizing traditional knowledge is crucial for understanding the history of local fisheries. 

The global issue of illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing affects both marine and freshwater ecosystems. IUU fishing includes illegal activities like fishing without a license or using prohibited gear, unreported catches that bypass official records and unregulated fishing without management strategies like fishing beyond the maximum sustainable yield or neglecting fishing seasons. As a major driver of overfishing, IUU activities jeopardise the economic backbone of the sustainable fisheries sector. Globally, IUU fishing practices lead to significant economic losses, estimated at USD 23.5 billion annually, mainly caused by industrial fleets. However, little is known about the impact of artisanal fisheries to fish stocks in coastal areas or inland waterbodies, which often remain unmanaged due to the absence of authorities or resources for data collection, reporting and surveillance. The same goes for small-scale fishers, who may struggle to comply with legal requirements such as using approved fishing gear, due to its unavailability and price. IUU fishing operations are furthermore often linked to other associated crimes, like the lack of safety regulations, fair working conditions and even the use of forced labour, to reduce costs and maximize profits.

Due to the relevance of combating IUU fishing, the FAO published many documents, including the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, the International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate IUU Fishing and Voluntary Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries. Our approach follows these guidelines in promoting human rights and fair access to resources. By addressing IUU fishing, we also contribute to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 1 and 2 (no poverty, no hunger) and SDG 14 (life below water). Other global efforts, such as the Conference of the Parties (COPs), Global Alliance for Food Security and the Blue Food Alliance, emphasize the urgent need for integrated and standardized operations. With this knowledge product, we wish to help others to support sustainable fishing practices in artisanal fishing communities and preserve aquatic resources for generations to come.

To ensure that fish production supported by the GP Fish is an accessible protein source also for the most vulnerable, GP Fish regularly tracks fish prices and the share of total production accessible to the food insecure population. According to the conducted surveys 90 %, 58 %, 84 %, and 99 % of farmed fish is accessible for the food insecure population in Madagascar, Malawi, Zambia, and Cambodia respectively (status 2023). These numbers again highlight the potential of extensive and semi-intensive aquaculture techniques to supply affordable protein and nutrients in areas with a high share of vulnerable people.

In addition to its economic viability, small-scale aquaculture is usually more environmentally friendly compared to industrial production systems based on industrialized feeds. Fish feed usually includes a certain ratio of fishmeal and fish oil and these ingredients are produced mainly from small pelagic fish from capture fisheries, which put an additional burden on the marine environment. It also affects the food insecure population because small pelagic fish are highly nutritious and help to combat food and nutrition insecurity directly. Fish feed also includes agricultural products like corn and soya, thus competing with food production for human consumption. Despite the negative externalities on ocean biodiversity, research has also shown that intensive aquaculture systems contribute more to global warming through automated processes and high demand for production inputs. Additionally, these systems cause habitat destruction and introduce alien species, which further affect the indigenous biodiversity. In contrast, extensive and semi-intensive small-scale aquacultures requires little external inputs and have less environmental impact. For this reason, GP Fish supports small-scale aquaculture farming of omnivorous fish species such as Carp and Tilapia. The aim is to empower producers technically and economically by optimizing pond productivity and integrating fish production into agriculture activities. This approach uses the natural environment sustainably to promote fish production.

What strategies need to be pursued to make more fish available to consumers in local markets? Because wild fish stocks are generally overfished, and the oceans’ ecosystems experience severe degradation the logical strategy is to increase fish supply through aquaculture. When increasing fish availability, especially for the food insecure population, the approach chosen must be environmentally sustainable, provide fish at an affordable price for this group (e.g., by avoiding additional costs such as for transportation) and should still offer the opportunity for producers to earn a living income.

The approach should therefore be centered around sustainable, decentralized aquaculture adapted to the limited financial and technical capacities of smallholders. Small-scale aquaculture in low-income countries plays already a crucial role in food and nutrition security as well as poverty reduction but still has significant potential to grow. On the one hand, vertically integrated aquaculture farms (companies that expand production to up- or downstream supply-chain activities) make important contributions to a country’s economic growth by increasing export earnings, but they usually have only little impact on the local fish supply and food security. On the other hand, small-scale aquaculture directly contributes to a higher fish consumption by the producers, depending on cultural preference for fish as a source of animal protein and to higher incomes that allow producers to purchase other foods.

When evaluating aquaculture as a source of income, it is important to consider that most small-scale farmers have little technical knowledge and financial capacities. These constraints prevent them from making larger investments for infrastructure and inputs, which are required when operating an intensive aquaculture production system. Formulated feeds, veterinarian products and machinery can significantly increase aquaculture production but are in most cases financially prohibitive for smallholders in remote rural areas. The required investments exceed their financial capacities by far and credits would put the household economies at risk. For this reason, technical and financial capacity development is so important. Optimizing the productivity of earthen ponds with low investments for fertilizer and supplementary feeds generating high profits per kg fish produced seems a workable way forward.

As an example, for a technique increasing production and being adapted to smallholders’ capacities, the GP Fish has introduced intermittent harvesting of Tilapia in Malawi. This practice is applied in mixed sex cultures of Tilapia, based on natural feed supplemented with agricultural by-products. Excess Tilapias, that hatched during the production cycle, are harvested by size-selective traps before reaching reproductive age. These frequently harvested fish are an easy-accessible protein source and nutrient-rich food component for a diversified diet and surplus production is generating additional income. Intermittent harvesting also reduces the economic risk of losing the entire production due to predators, theft, diseases, or natural disasters.

Globally, fish consumption shows strong regional differences. For instance, in 2009 the average yearly fish consumption per capita in Africa was 9kg, while in Asia it reached almost 21kg per person. On every continent, small island developing states or coastal countries have higher consumption rates than their landlocked counterparts. In addition to these differences, the FAO State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture report of 2022 predicts these regional imbalances to increase in the future while fish consumption in Africa is expected to further decline.

These observations are consistent with the findings of the baseline studies conducted by the GP Fish, which found that the median annual fish consumption per capita was 0.9 kg in Malawi (2018), 1.1kg in Madagascar (2018), 1.8 kg in Zambia (2021), but 24.4kg in Cambodia (2022). It must be noted that these consumption patterns reflect the situation of the rural population, who typically have lower incomes compared to the national average. Considering the recommended average yearly fish consumption of 10 kg per person, these findings are worrying.

Considering the importance of fish as a protein and nutrient source for rural households it is important to better understand fish consumption patterns and their impact on food and nutrition security. In Malawi, Madagascar, Zambia and Cambodia the GP Fish and the Global Programme Food and Nutrition Security, Enhanced Resilience (GP Food and Nutrition Security hereafter) are working together to improve food and nutrition security. While the data from the GP Fish are focused on fish production and consumption of close by consumers, data from the GP Food and Nutrition Security provide information about the consumption of different protein sources by the Individual Dietary Diversity Score (IDDS). The GP Food and Nutrition Security collected data from women of reproductive age living in rural, low-income households, not focusing on people involved in the fisheries and aquaculture sector and the surveys included questions to determine a household food security status. Using the extensive dataset allowed an assessment of the current role of fish in comparison to other animal and plant protein sources, without the bias of an increased fish consumption among households involved in fish production. Given that data collection was based on 24-hour recalls, the table in the Annex contextualizes the date of the survey with seasonal implications on fish availability (fishing ban, harvesting seasons), indicating that results can be considered representative.

The frequency of the consumption of various protein sources over the last 24 hours, disaggregated by food security status, is shown in Figure 3. The food protein sources include fish and seafood, pulses (beans, peas, lentils), meat and poultry, eggs, and milk and dairy products. The percentages indicate how many of the respondents consumed a particular protein source (e.g., 19% of the food insecure women in Madagascar have consumed fish and seafood in the last 24 hours). The overall height of the column indicates the aggregated frequency of protein consumption by respondents for each country. Lowest frequency of protein consumption within the last 24 hours for food insecure respondents was found in Madagascar and the highest in Cambodia.

Figure 3 reveals several interesting trends:

1. In general, fish is currently the most frequently consumed protein source in nearly all countries. The importance of fish as a protein source can be explained by the fact that fish is often more affordable, more accessible, and culturally preferred compared to other animal- or plant-based protein sources.

2. Food secure respondents do not in general consume fish more frequently compared to food insecure respondents. This indicates that fish is a source of protein and nutrients that is accessible also to the most vulnerable, namely the food insecure population.

3. The results show regional differences in the frequency of protein consumption between African countries and Cambodia: in Madagascar, Malawi, and Zambia, between 19 – 56% of food insecure respondents and 38 –39% of food secure respondents have consumed fish during the last 24 hours, while in Cambodia more than 80% of the respondents consumed fish during the last 24 hours, independent of the food security status. These results are consistent with the abundance of fish in Cambodia, while access to fish in African countries is often limited by seasonality and distance from water bodies.

In addition to the differences between countries, Figure 4 illustrates high differences in consumption patterns within one country. In Zambia, the GP Food and Nutrition Security found fish to be a consumed by 68.3% (food insecure) and 88.5% (food secure) of the interviewed women in the last 24 hours, while in the Eastern Province, it was only 16.5% and 23.2% respectively. This is consistent with the results from the GP Fish survey, which found that the median annual fish consumption in Luapula Province was 2.2kg and 5.2 kg per capita, while fish consumption in Eastern Province amounts to only 0.9 kg for food insecure and 2kg per year for the food secure respondents. These results suggest that the Chambeshi/Luapula river system and connected wetlands in Luapula Province make fish more accessible than in the rather dry Eastern Province. For the success of new interventions in the field of food and nutrition security related to fish production and consumption, the local conditions and cultural context are important factors to consider during the planning process.

In the first step of the solution GP Fish seeks to provide evidence about the role of fish in addressing malnutrition and supporting healthy diets, particularly for food insecure households. It is directed to professionals working in the field of food and nutrition security as well as rural development and investigates questions like “Does fish feed the poor, or is it too expensive?” By combining scientific insights with hands-on data from years of field experience, supplemented by practical examples, it aims to provide a broad overview of the current state in selected countries and a path forward.

Malnutrition is the most important aspect of food and nutrition insecurity and comes in many forms: undernutrition, overnutrition, and micronutrient deficiencies, often referred to as “hidden hunger”. The latter represents a major public health concern and results from inadequate intake of nutrients, such as iron, zinc, calcium, iodine, folate, and different vitamins. Strategies to combat micronutrient deficiencies include supplementation, (agronomic) biofortification, and most importantly diet diversification, which is the focus of contemporary policy discourses concerning the improvement of human nutrition. Diversifying diets by consuming animal proteins can significantly prevent micronutrient deficiencies, especially in low-income food-deficit countries, where diets are predominantly carbohydrate-based. Fish is a highly nutritious food that provides proteins, essential fatty acids, and micronutrients, as shown in Figure 1, to the point that it is sometimes referred to as a “superfood”. Due to its nutritional properties, even small quantities of fish can make important contributions to food and nutrition security. This is particularly true for small fish species that are consumed whole – including bones, heads, and guts –in regions where nutritional deficiencies and reliance on blue foods are high.

Figure 2 shows the share of recommended nutrient intake when consuming aquatic vs. terrestrial foods. Food sources are arranged from highest (top) to lowest (bottom) nutrient density. Visibly, aquatic “blue” foods like fish and mussels, are richer in nutrients compared to terrestrial sources. They are specifically good sources for Omega-3 fatty acids and Vitamin B12. Therefore, “blue foods” not only offer a remarkable opportunity for transforming our food systems but also contribute to tackling malnutrition.