Greeningthe Pink Gold-A perspective on the economic potential

and market/trade prospects ofOrganic Aqua-Products in India

Ramchandran. C and R. Sathiadhas{Socio-Economic Evaluation and Technology Transfer Division,

Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute, Kochi}

Yet to catch the fancy of either the Indian con-sumers or the organic practitioners, organic fish isthe latest fad- but of course a very big market op-portunity-that the organic bandwagon has off-loaded. There is lot of demand in countries like USfor organically grown fish products. It is surpris-ing that the Indian entrepreneurs are hesitant tolatch on organic fish esp. shrimp unlike that of theorganic agricultural produce like mangoes, tea orspices. But it is high time for us to .switch over toorganic ways at least to reap the premium price itoffers in the export market. The most recent devel-opment like the decision of the US Congress to al-low labeling of wild seafood as organic (http://juneauempire.com) has opened an array of busi-ness opportunities to the seafood exporting coun-tries.

In most ofthe developed countries environmentis no longer a trend but a standard issue in busi-ness negotiations (Stern,2002). Many counties likeEcuador with stringent standards have taken thelead in capturing the organic pie. On the global fishmarket, shrimp accounts for only 3% by weight,but 20% by monetary value. More than 30% ofshrimp imported py the major markets like USA,Japan and Europe comes from aquaculture i.e.about 800 000 metric tonnes and about 2 milliontones (;ontributed by capture fisheries. But the realfuture development lies in shrimp farming and es-pecially produced in the organic way.This paper isa wake-up call for engendering proactive initiativesto tap the potential benefits from this emergingmarket.

The booming organic marketThe global market for organic food is booming,

worth approximately US$ 20 billion in 2000.(Lockwood, 2000). The largest single market for

organic food is the US with sales of around US$ 10billion followed by Europe with about US $9 bil-lion and Japan US$ 1.5billion. In Europe Germanyalone accounted for up to US$ 2.5 billion. (Table 1)

However compared to the global conventionalfoodmarket (worth an estimated US$5 trillion), theorganic market is still a niche market (0.3%mar-ket share)~ But the organic growth rate exhibitedby many countries can not be brushed aside. Overall the growth rate is 20-30% in countries like Den-mark, Germany, The Netherlands etc. This repre-sents an interesting combination of product andmarket diversification whose rationale is basedupon the consumer perceiving value to be added tothe product through its differentiated, more natu-ral but controlled production regime. The group ofconsumers prepared to pay a price premium for theproduct constitutes a discreet yet growing marketsegment (Young,2001).

The sale of organic salmon in Europe has in-

" ,,' 15

SEAFOOD EXPORT"'J-OURNAL

Table-I. European market for organic products

Country Retail sales Annual(million US$) growth rate (%)

Germany 2500 10Italy 1100 20France 1250 20-25UK 900 25-30Switzerland 700 20-30Netherlands 600 15-20Denmark 600 30-40Austria 400 15Sweden 400 30-40Others 500 NATotal 9900 NA

Source: Stern, 2002.

creased from 12 mt in 1997 to 500 mt in 1999 andalmost 2000 mt in 2000. Ecuador is leading the or-ganic prawn market in US. Many countries includ-ing that of EU have formulated standards for or-ganic fish a la organic farm produce.

Why organic?

The expansion of organic food market may beattributed to a number offactors. The most impor-tant is the purchasing power of the consumer get-ting increasingly empowered by health and envi-ronmental concerns many of which embrace ele-ments of safety, naturalness, trustworthiness, andgreen values of the food product.

Their heightened awareness is shaped more byscary events like mad cow disease, pesticide andantibiotic residues, apprehensions about the Ge-netically Modified (GM)crops etc rather than any-thing teleological. The realization that there are'limits to growth" especially the one riveted on theuse of petroleum resources and the issues ofsustainability getting wider attention beyond therhetoric have also played a role. Another factor isthe ability of modern science to develop more andmore sophisticated devicesthat can detect evenveryminute quantities of contamination-chemical ormicrobiological-in our food. (On the flip side, thosewho accuse the real motive of developed countriesfor supporting organic farming as a cleverly doc-tored market facade to tide over the "subsidy im-broglio" are also not rare).

The aquaculture industry the world over is fac-ing brickbats from the eco-lobbyfor the allegeduseof antibiotics and many chemicals which cause se-rious ecologicalas well as health hazards. Farmedshrimp has now a very negative image in Europemainly due to the detection of an antibioticChloramphenicol in imported shrimp. There havebeen many cases where residue of antibiotic andsimilar chemicals in the sample has exceeded thestandards set by World Health Organisation(WHO).

It is a well-known "secret" that the Indianprawn farmer like any of his counterparts in otherparts-ofthe world also compromises his ecologicalconcerns over the lucre of the pink gold. But it canno longer be so. If you want to survive, your pinkgold has to be green too. This is the market mantrafor the future.

Organic Aquaproduction- Developments

a) Organic certifications and eco-labellingWith changes in shopping patterns and in par-

ticular the growth of supermarkets, substantive

changes have occurred in the market for fish andthe way in which it is brought. To ensure that pro-duction methods are able to protect the environ-ment the market is taking up new approaches. La-beling is one of them. It is being increasingly usedas a marketing tool.

The idea of adopting an eco-labeling system formarine capture fisheries was first promoted by theMarine Stewardship Council (MSC), a non profitorganization funded by Unilever and the WorldWide Fund for Nature in 1996. Sustainability aswell as avoiding over- fishing and by catches -thetwo most important aspects of modern fishing thatcause considerable environmental damage-must beinspected and .certified,by a third party.

The first attempt in drafting organic aquacul-ture standards was made by the Soil Association inUK in 1989. The International Federation of Or-ganic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) in its ca-pacity as global umbrella body for organic foodandfarming came out with basic standards for organicaquaculture, which were approved in its 1998Gen-eral Assembly.The EU Organic Livestock Regula-tion cameinto forcein August 2000.It recognizesfish farming as being eligible for organic status butthe EU has not yet defined its own rules for or-ganic production system. The UK Register of Or-ganic Food Standards (UKROFS) 'recognised ' theUK organic aquaculture standards in July 2000.

There are now a number of organizations/agen-cies that give certification of organic aquacultureproducts. Leading among them are Naturland ofGermany , KRA V of Sweden and Soil Associationof UK. The Soil association, founded by pioneeringorganic philosophers Rudolf Steiner and lady EveBalfour in 1940, licenses about 70%of organic pro-duction in UK. According to the standards set bythem-which they call as interim- organic fish man-agement aims to produce healthy stock by positivemeans, including good stockman ship, careful sit-ing, appropriate nutrition, minimizing stress, en-couraging a high level of resistance to disease andappropriate preventive measures. The well being

. ofthe stock and surrounding environment are para-mount. The standards also make it clear that if thehealth of the fish is at risk, the appropriate treat-ment must be given even if it is a product that isnot permitted under organic standards and whichtherefore results in the stock losing its organic sta-tus. Failure to treat could lead to the fish farm los-ing its organic certification entirely. These a.,oen-cies are yet to make their presence felt as much asin the case of organic agriculture in India.

SEAFOOD EXPORT

-,r~URNAL-

,/

b) Organic Aquafarming-the conceptOrganic fish farming is a new concept and is still

in the early stages of development. It aims to rees-tablish a .proper balance in aquaculture systems,for the benefit of the fish, the environment, andthe consumers. Organic fish farming systems andstandards that define them are likely to requireconsiderable evolution and refinement in the yearsto come.

In organic fish farming many of the pesticides,dyes, and antibiotics widely used in conventionalfish farming are not permitted and so these fishproducts are generally accepted to be credible "or-ganic 'products. However from the animal welfarepoint of view,there is a controversy about allowingfarmed fish to be labeled as organic. Organic prin-ciples demand that livestock (which includes fish)should be able to express its natural behavior pat-tern and kept as close to natural stocking densitiesas possible. This requirement can be satisfied formussels without difficulty, and trout and manyother fresh water fish are reared in large ponds /reservoirs at low stocking densities. OrganicSalmon and trout first went on to sale in the UK in1999.

Key principles for setting standardsThere are mainly three key issues to be con-

sidered while setting up standards.

1) Nutrient cycling/closed systemsNutrient cyclingwithin (as far as possible)closed

systems, following "the law ofreturn", is a centralorganic principle. This in fact remains as the ma-jor stumbling block in setting up standards sincemost of the species suitable for aquaculture arecarnivorous fish and their diet is fishmeal, whichis derived from the sea. More research efforts arerequired to develop better cyclical systems.

2) WaterSince water is both air and soil for the fish the

quality of water plays a very important role in de-ciding the quality of the produce. So maintenance/enhancement ofits health status means cleanlinessand freedomfrom pollution. So the Standards mustdefine the quality parameters for the incoming (interms of its purity as an input) as well as the out-goingwater (in terms ofthe environmental impact).

3) FeedA major portion i.e. 60-70 % of the fish feed for

the farmed fish is composed of fish meal and fishoil and the rest being cereal based products, vita-mins, minerals etc. The agricultural component

must be organic in origin and the other non-fishderived components must come from the by-prod-ucts of wild -caught fish for human consumption(that is the waste from filleting etc). The remindermust come from sources that are independentlycertified as sustainably managed. While harvest-ing fishmeal sustainably is important it does notmake the fish meal or fish oil organic. This is an-other "head ache" especiallyfor the developedcoun-tries as the level of dioxins and organo-chlorinepollutants in the marine fish being caught therefrom which fish meal is manufactured is abovesafe/acceptable levels.

Some ofthe other basic principles oforganic fishproduction system are

1. Intensive monitoring of environmentalimpact

2. Integration of natural plant communitiesin farm management

3. Processing according to organic principles4. Natural breeding procedures without use

of hormones and antibiotics5. Absence of GMOs in stocks and feed

6. Limitation of stock density7. Feed and fertilizer from certified organic

agriculture8. Criteria for fish meal sources.

9. No inorganic fertilizers10. No synthetic pesticides and herbicides11. Restriction of energy consumption12. Preference for natural medicines.

Organic farming. more of an attitude thana technology?

Organic farming is not merely abandoning syn-thetic chemicals. A commitment to human rightsand social justice are already an integral part ofthe principles, which inform organic farming andprocessing, and are recognized as such in interna-tional organic standards (Ramchandran,1997).Recently the Soil Association in association withFairtrade Foundation has launched a trial to en-sure that the organic products demonstrate thatthey are making a real contribution to social, cul-tural and environmental development in the coun-tries of their origin. The FAIRTRADE mark is theonly independent consumer label that ensuresfarmers and workers in the developing world get abetter deal. Under the project, companies sellingproducts from UK farms as well as from develop-ing countries and elsewhere can apply to carry the

.. ./ 19

SEAFOOD EXPORT RNAL

FAIRTRADE and Soil Association marks.

Under Fairtrade standards the price paid tofarmers must cover the sustainable cost of produc-tion, which includes a margin for profit and invest-ment. In addition, buyers should commit to long-term relationships that enable growers to plan fu-ture production with confidence. Similar initiativesare now available in other countries like Denmark,which has the highest percapita organic spendingin the world-around 5%offood sales are on organicproducts, compared with around 1%in the UK.

The SoilAssociation is also involved in clearingmisconceptions on organic fish farming. When theBBCreported that the farmed fish contained higherlevels of chemicals like PCBs or dioxins and organ-isms like sea lice the Association came out callingthe reports baseless. In a clarification they men-tioned the lack of research studies to support theallegation and that hydrogen peroxide is permit-ted to treat sea liceunder their certification scheme.

Prospects in IndiaIndia has a huge potential for organic fish pro-

duction and the trade/market prospects are verybright. The organic production prospects can beanalyzed under culture and capture fisheries sec-tors.

a) Culture fisheries

The aquaculture industry in India has been iden-tified as a sunrise area. With 2 million ha underreservoirs, 2.85 million ha under ponds /tanks and1.4 million ha under the brackish water system,the potential are for aquaculture is impressive.Though carp spp. occupies the major place in thefresh water system, shrimp leads the position inthe brackish water areas. Out of the total potentialbrackish water area of 1.4 million ha only 1.6lakhha (hardly 10%) is being used for shrimp culture.Still it. leads the export market contributing 58%by quantity and 85% by value.

Shrimp is being cultivated in fivedifferent typesof aquaculture systems in the country viz. Tradi-tional, Extensive, Modified Extensive, Semi-inten-sive and Intensive. Based on Alagarsami (1995)andJames (1999) it is estimated that currently about50, 000 ha of brackish water area is under tradi-tional system. (Table 2).Table 2.. Brackish water Shrimp area underdifferent systemsNo. Type1. Traditional2. Extensive

Area (ha)

50,000

90,000

3 Semi-intensive 20,0004 Intensive 1000

A comparison of these systems on selected pa-rameters would reveal that the traditional systemof shrimp farming is nothing but organic bydefault.(Table 3).

With a modest assumption of25% ofthe shrimpproduction as "organic' we estimate that an addi-tional of about Rs. 1800 cores can be realized fromits organic export market.

(The price advantage at present is 3-4 times forthe organic shrimp in the international market). Itis evident that the potential for organic shrimp pro-duction (both in terms of area and value added pro-duction) from the brackish water system is substan-tial.

b) Capture fisheriesIn the case of capture fisheries shrimp catches

has increased from one lakh tones during 1983 toabout 2 lakh tones in 2000.The mechanised fleetin our coastal waters is concentrating more onshrimp trawling and the catch rate of shrimp frommarine fisheries is declining (Sathiadhas andBiradar, 2000).However the export value for shrimpat present is to the tune of Rs 3500 crores fromabout 74800 tones. If the marine shrimp exporterscan get a mere 25% of their produce labeled as or-ganic ( for e.g.: by utilizing the provisions of therecent US congress decision of labeling wild sea-food as organic) an additional Rs 3000 crores canbe realized. The possibility of exporting the entiremarine shrimp as organic is not a farfetched one.

The major strengths that enable us to make atransition to organic production systems are. The traditional systems of aqua farming qualify

as the best candidate for organic by any stan-dards. Making transition to organic system es-pecially in Extensive systems of shrimp farm-ing is easy.

. Technology for the production of low cost or-ganic feeds is available. ( For e.g.. Mahimashrimp feed developed by CMFRI, Kochi.)

. Comparatively clean and pollution-free waterbodies are available.

. The emerging organic market for agricultureproducts in the country will give a boost to or-ganic fish production systems as well.

. The natural seed availability is not in periL

. Institutional support system in the fisheries sec-tor, for research and trade in general, is capableto tackle the transition challenges.

~- 21

SEA F 0 0 D EX P 0 R T "'J0 URN A L

Suggested MeasuresIn this context some of the steps, which demand

immediate attention and concerted action, to tapthe stupendous potential of organic fish productionin India are suggested below:

1.Those water bodies, which are comparativelyfar away from pollution hotspots, should be demar-cated for organic fish farming as 'Organic FishFarming Reserve Zones". The governmentshould promulgate necessary regulations in addi-tion to making amendments in the CRZ rules inorder to keep these areas eco-protected.

2. Organic fish production in isolated ponds maynot be feasible in many places. The best option isto dp it on a group-farming basis. This can notonly ensure better control over ecologicalstandardsbut also reduce the cost of cultivation. AgencieslikeMPEDA should come forward to assist such collec-tives of organic fish farmers to get organic certifi-cation. Going organic is a sure way of value addi-tion, which is ecologicallyand economicallycorrect.

3. The need of the hour is to develop indig-enous standards taking into consideration thegeopolitical peculiarities of our region. Though

23- - ~ ~

SEAFOOD EXPORT""J-OURNAL

Table 3. Comparison of shrimp culture systems

Character Traditional Extensive Semi-intensive Intensive

Pond size Less than 5ha 1-5 ha 0.2-0.5 ha 0.03 -0.1ha

Stocking density Natural, under Natural and Artificial Artificial10,000/ha artificial 1-3 lakh /ha 5-20 lakh /ha10000/ha

Feed source Natural Natural and Formulated Formulatedformulated

Seed source Natural/wild Hatchery/wild Hatchery Hatchery

Fertilizers None Organic and Organic and Organic andbiodegradable biodegradable biodegradable

Diversity of crop Poly culture Mainly Mono culture Monoculturemonoculture

Diseases Very rare Rare Moderate Frequent

Management Minimal Minimal with Skilled Highly skilledsome skilled

Employment No figure, Up to 7 persons / 1-3 persons per 1 person /ha ,but 30-40% of ha 45 days per ha for 26 days only 6% ofoperating cost working cycle operating cost isfor labour for labour

Effluent treatment Not required Not required required required

Environmental and *Self-sustaining *self sustaining *External input *High dependenceorganic implications *Ecologically with inputs dependent on external inputs

benign *Sustainability *Self polluting *Least sustainable*High sustaina- and ecological *transition time *Pollutesbility due to fish- benign ness more environmentpaddy rotation moderate *less sustainable transition* Products *Produces *only shrimp difficult(fishes, rice etc) only shrimporganic by * transition todefault organic is easy

Source: Shiva and Karir(1997) (modified).

many agencies including APEDA have come outwith organic standards for agriculture muchprogress needs to be made in the case of aquacul-ture.

4 The research system has to take a proactiveposition in evaluating the revival of traditionalsystems of aquaculture (like the pokkali-chemmenkettu system of Kerala, Bheries system inWest Bengal, Gheri system of Orissa, Khar lands ofKarnataka etc. as viable ways of producing organicfish.

Different systems of traditional aquaculturemay be compared and evaluated in well-laid con-trol experiments to find out the maneuverabilityof various biotic and abiotic factors that determinethe transition period required while making aswitch to the organic production systems. The effi-cacy of biological alternatives to chemical inputsalso need to be studied in terms of economic ad-vantage and local resource endowments.

5.Eco-Production incentives (promoting theconcept of Total Quality Management) need to begiven to traditional aqua stakeholders. The revivalof traditional aquaculture systems as sustainableecologicalmodels will not only ensure better liveli-hood security but also redeem the coastal waterbodies from the specter of multiple- user conflicts.The eco-tourism prospects also will get a boost inthese areas.

6. Urgent efforts are needed to trade -protectthese unique systems of traditionally sustainableaquaculture systems using the WTO provisionsfor Geographic Appellations.

7. In the case of capture fisheries ResponsibleFishing Practices (in fishing operations, process-ing, marketing etc) need to be promoted amongmarine fisherfolk and the industry.

Us.eof eco-friendly capture techniques need tobe encouraged.

New criteria for sustain ability need to be de-fined. For e.g. Defining value /price of catch by in-ternalizing the externalities like the amount of en-ergy ti!at goesinto one kg offish from catch to dish).

The catch from the artisanal/traditional sectorthat uses only human labour power thus avoidingthe use ofpetroleum fuels can be traded as organic.

8. The potential of the domestic market for or-ganic fish and related products need to be assessed.Consumer awareness programmes can bejointlyundertaken by the industry and research/extensionagencies. A possible fall out may be the adverseimpact it can have on the market for non-organic

fish. But the question is why should the domesticconsumer be discriminated against access to saferfish foods? In fact the ecological as well as healthconsciousness of the domestic consumer has grownup so much that it is gullible enough to be goadedinto a market opportunity.

Conclusion

The organic seafood market all over the worldis gaining prominence. Indiawith its vast aquacul-ture and marine fisheries potential has tremendousprospects in the emerging market opportunities fororganic fish production and its trade. The need ofthe hour is to make earnest efforts (research, policyand political) to develop strategies that enable usto utilize the opportunity thus raking very valu-able benefits to the economy. What are required aresynergetic interventions by the Government, Fish-eries Industry and the Research system.

(The encouragements of Dr. Mohan JosephModayil, the Director, CMFRI, Kochi in writingthis paper is gratefully acknowledged).

References

Alagarsamy, K.1995. India country case study.NACA Environment and Aquaculture DevelopmentSeries No. 1(TCP/RAS/2253), Bangkok, Thailand.

James, PSBR.1999. Shrimp farming develop-ment in India-an overview of environmental, socio-economic, legal and other implications. Aquacul-ture Magazine, December.(lnternet.)

Lockwood,G.M.2000. Organic fish- a major mar-ket opportunity. Aquaculture Magazine,26(6).

Ramchandran, C.1997. Ecofriendly technologiesfor sustainable agriculture -A case of Biofarmingin Kerala, PhD Thesis, Indian Agricultural Re-search Institute, New Delhi.

Sathiadhas, Rand Biradar, R.S.2000. Fisher-ies in the development of Indian economy: InSathiadhas and Venkateswaran (eds) Proceedingsof National Conference on Fisheries EconomicsExtension and Management, 5-6 Jan, pp 3-4.

Shiva, Vandana and Karir, Gurpeet.1997. To-wards Sustainable Aquaculture: Chemmeenkettu.Research Foundation for Science, Technology andEcology, New Delhi. pp 7-8.

Stern, Markus.2002. Organic seafood-gainingprominence in Europe. INFOFISH International 2/2002. Pp 8-11.

Young, J.A .2001. Communicating with cod andothers-some perspectives on promotion for expand-ing markets for fish. Aquaculture Economics and

Management.5 (5/6):241~251. ~

~' 25SEAFOOD EXPORT~JltURNAi,

Quality control:3:1.Harmonised standards for the testing

for certain residues in products of animalorigin (EU Decision 2005/34/EC)

The European Commission Directive 2005/34/EC of 11thJanuary, 2005 laying down harmonizedstandards for the testing for certain residues inproducts of animal origin imported from third coun-tries has come into force with effect from 19thFeb-ruary, 2005. This is in the context of the Commis-sion Regulation (EEC) No.2377/90, which did notprescribe MRPLs for those substances whose useis prohibited or not authorized in the Community,the presence of which may present grounds to re-ject or destroy the relevant consignment at import.

For the purpose of control of residues of certainsubstances whose use is prohibited or not autho-rized in the Community, the Minimum RequiredPerformance Limits (MRPLs) laid down in AnnexII to Decision 2003/181/EC shall be used as refer-ence points for action irrespective of the matrixtested.

Where results of analytical tests are at or abovethe MRPLs laid down in Decision 2002/657/EC,theconsignment concerned shall be considered noncompliant with Community legislation.

Pending the application of Articles 19 to 22 ofRegulation (EC)No882/2004from 1stJanuary, 2006,the Decision 2005/34/EC lays down that the Com-petent Authorities of the member states shall placeunder officialdetention non compliant consignmentfrom third countries and having heard the foodbusiness operators responsible for the consignment,shall take the following measures :

a) Order that the consignment be destroyed orre dispatched

b) If the consignments have already been placedon ~he market, recall the consignments before de-struction or re dispatch

The Competent Authority shall allow re-dis-patch only if:

a) the destination has been agreed with the feedor food business operator responsible for the con-signment.

b) the foodbusiness operator has first informedthe Competent Authority of the country of originor country of destination, the reasons for re dis-patch.

c) In the case of country of destination not be-ing the country of origin the preparedness to ac-cept the consignment has to be notified to the Com-petent Authority.

A re-dispatch shall take place no more than 60

days after the day on which the Competent Author-ity decided on the destination of the consignment.If re-dispatch does not take place in 60 days theconsignment shall be destroyed.

Where the results of analytical tests on prod-ucts are below the MRPLs laid down in Decision2003/181/EC, the products will not be prohibitedfrom entering the food chain, but the CompetentAuthority shall retain a record of the findings incase of recurrence.

The feed or food business operator responsiblefor the consignment or its representative shall beliable for the costs incurred by the Competent Au-thorities in re-dispatch / destruction.Minimum Required Performance Limit

1 IChloramphenicol 0.3 ppb

2 IMedroxyprogesterone acetate 1 ppb

3 INitrofuran metabolites-Furazolidone ]-Furaltadone] 11 ppb for all-Nitrofurntoin ]-Nitrofurazone]

4 ISum of malachite green andleucomalachite Green(2004/25/EC) in meat of I2 ppbaquaculture productsr

(Source:MPEDA)

Technologiesinformation:

4:1. Cold storages: more of nerve centresof logistics now in USA

Cold storage industry is on the fast track to be-come logistics nerve centres. In response to cus-tomers -importers, exporters and distributors- de-mand, freezer warehouses in US are expandingtheir mix of services to include blast freezing, cus-tom packing, and even distribution of product.State- of -the- art technologies are revolutionizingsupply-inventory management systems and cuttingcosts by boosting customer's access to inventory andinformation. Seafood companies are the major cus-tomers of such big cold storages.

One of the warehouses is implementing the lat-est product tracking technology called "Radio Fre-quency Identification" (RFID).

This new technology helps the customers tomove the product around with out talking anyoneof the staff in the storage. Heralded as a replace-ment for the traditional barcode technology,RFIDremoves the scanning for tracking ofinventory that

and other

27

SEAFOOD EXPORT"'JOURNAL

is ubiquitous today in cold storage facilities. It al-lows customers to automatically determine inven-tory status, generate shipping-and-receiving docu-ments and even correct product shortages.

Another chain of warehouses is employing aweb-based product tracking and wireless technol-ogy.It offers a full range of customer services, in-cluding flash freezing, packing and product label-ing. Its facilities have on-site US Department ofagriculture inspection for imports.

The motto of the ware houses seems to be '~ustIn Time" (JIT), a Japanese system ofinventory con-trol alsoknown as "Toyota System". JIT essentiallymeans getting product to the customer "just intime" to sell to the customer.

(source: IntraFish).

4:2. Annual per capita consumption of fishand shellfish for human food by select

countries (average of 1995-97)

RegionandCountry

Live weightequivalent

in KgNorth AmericaCanada 22.2GreenLand 84.1U.S.A 20.9Latin AmericaArgentina 11.1Brazil 6.9Colombia 4.5CostaRica 5.2Ecuador 7.2Guatemala 1.1Mexico 10.5Nicaragua 1.3Peru 25.4Venezuela 20.1EuropeAustria 1.3Belgium&Luxembourg 19.6CzechRepublic 8.6Denmark 23.6FaeroeIsland 86.1Finland 32.8FraI1ce' 28.4Germany 12.4Greece 25.4Iceland 91.1Ireland 16.8Italy 22.0Netherlands 15.4Norway 50.1Poland 10.5Portugal 59.8

RussianFederation 19.5Spain 40.5SwedenSwitzerland 26.1UK 13.8Yugoslavia 20.12.1Near EastBahrain 16.2Egypt 9.3Iran 1.6Israel 22.6Kuwait 12.5Oman 24.0Qatar 12.3Saudi Arabia 6.5Turkey 8.3UAE 27.4Far EastBangladesh 10.1Burma 16.9ChinaHongKong 24.1India 56.6Indonesia 4.6Japan 17.9Maldives 69.0Malaysia 169.8North Korea 55.7Pakistan 16.9Philippines 2.0Singapore 31.0South Korea 32.4Sri Lanka 51.2Taiwan 18.8Thailand 37.3Vietnam 32.4 16.9

4:3. CANADIAN RATALIATION AGAINSTU.S' FAILURE TO COMPLY RULING ONBYRD AMENDMENT:

The Government of Canada announced todaythat it would retaliate against the United States inlight of its failure to comply with the World TradeOrganization (WTO) ruling on the Byrd Amend-ment. Following extensive consultations with do-mestic stakeholders, Canada will impose 15percentsurtax on US. live swine, cigarettes, oysters andcertain specialty fish, starting May 1, 2005. Today,the Commission of the European Union has pro-posed imposing retaliatory measures as trade sanc-tions on certain products from the United States.Canada continues to cooperate closelywith all sevenWTO Members that have received authorizationto retaliate. These countries may also exercise theirretaliatory rights over the next few months. "Forthe last four years, Canada and a numberof other countries have repeatedly urged the UnitedStates to repeal the Byrd Amendment," said Inter-national Trade Minister Jim Peterson. "Retaliationis not our preferred option, but it is a necessaryaction. International trade rules must be re-spected." Over two years ago,the ByrdAmendment,which allows US. producers to receive antidump-ing and countervailing duties from foreigncompetitors, was found by the WTO to be inconsis-tent with U.S.trade obligations. In November 2004,the WTO gave Canada and the other co-complain-ants the authority to retaliate. ''As large tradingnations, let us not forget that the worldis watching," said Minister Peterson. "Wemust senda clear message by way of our actions." The Minis-ter emphasized that the Canada-U.S. overall traderelationship is as strong as ever. "Ninety-six per-cent of it works and works well and should be cel-ebrated, but both sides lose from such disputes. Wemust put an end to them," he added. Through con-.sultations, Canada has made efforts to focus onproducts with alternative supply sources and toavoid products that are inputs to Canadian manu-facturing. Canada's current retaliation level is $14million. The Government will review the productseach year against the fluctuating nature of Byrddisbursements.

(Source: EC)

29-- ~ ~ ----

SEAFOOD EXPORT y.rOURNAL