reLAKSation 159.

Disrupting the market?: In 1989, the price of salmon in the European market collapsed. Salmon production in Europe had soared to meet the increasing demand for luxury products during the boom years of the 1980s. However, by 1989, this demand had been sated and as a result, prices fell. It could be argued that the industry had been over-producing beyond the limits of demand, but the long production cycle had meant that warnings of the demise of the economic boom were too late for farmers to adjust production accordingly.

Fortunately, lower salmon prices created a whole new market for salmon. Salmon evolved from being a luxury product to an everyday value for money meal choice. The scope for demand suddenly grew from a limited niche market to a marketplace with an almost infinite potential, which continues to exist even today. The salmon industry had a unique opportunity to capitalise on the lower prices and supply this limitless demand. Sadly, the Scottish industry of the time were unable to see this potential and opted to try protecting the luxury status of their fish. They blamed the collapse on Norwegian dumping and turned to Brussels to seek redress, without much success.

It is now nearly fifteen years since prices collapsed in 1989 and yet this minority of independent Scottish producers continue to use imported salmon as a scapegoat for their own failure to adapt to a changing market. They are unable to see that most of the subsequent market disruption has been of their own making. The constant accusations of over-production and dumping has had an increasingly negative effect on market confidence in the industry, as have the recurring excursions to DG Trade in Brussels. These repeated attempts to seek the imposition of trade measures have contributed more to the destabilisation of market prices than any production from Norway and elsewhere.

The latest attempts to impose permanent safeguard measures provide ample illustration as to how confidence in the industry is being significantly undermined. This demand for safeguards have been instigated by a minority of small producers in Scotland, yet the consequences will ripple throughout the whole of the global marketplace. What this small group of Scottish producers have been unable to see is that farmed salmon has now become a critically important part of world fish supply. They cannot appreciate that their own reluctance to adapt to an evolving market demand will impact on many others.

Even within the EU, there is disagreement as to how the application for safeguards should have been addressed. Denmark is still extremely unhappy about the way that the needs of its processing sector has been by-passed and in Scotland, there has been concern that the interests of the whole industry have not been recognised. Sadly, support of  the safeguard process appears to have been dependent on what one country did previously for another in the world of European politics rather than on the rights and wrongs of the case. This lack of regard to both the wider industry and the market has only led to further uncertainty and diminishing confidence. Having decided that Norway is guilty as the Scots maintain, the European Commission imposed a provisional quota on imports of Norwegian salmon. Yet in an attempt to appease the Danes, they now appear to have changed their mind. According to IntraFish, they firstly considered increasing the quota limit, but they now appear to have opted to re-impose a Minimum Import Price, which speculation suggests will be set at NOK 25.50 or Euro 3.05.

Already, fisheries consultant in Brussels, Torben Foss has said that this level is too high and is unlikely to be accepted by the industry. This is not surprising as the IntraFish price guide shows that salmon prices are currently NOK 21.43 or Euro 3.36. Buyers are unlikely to be want to pay these prices when the market demands the best possible value for money. Already some Danish processors have indicated that they might look to Chile to see if the industry there can meet its needs. Other processors are likely to follow. Its not rocket science to see that in the global market, these safeguard measures are unlikely to succeed, not because of any deliberate attempt by Norwegian producers to circumvent the measures, but because the marketplace will not accept them. This divergence between what the EU and the marketplace want will undoubtedly contribute to further market disruption as the measures fail to satisfy the demands of the complainant industry. Clearly, the European Salmon Producers Group must already recognise this which is why they are planning to submit another dumping and subsidy complaint leading to more disruption and uncertainty.

DG Trade and the European Salmon Producers Group only need to read an article, which recently appeared in IntraFish reporting that the turbulent retail sector continues to put the squeeze on suppliers. Geest, a supplier of a variety of fresh foods to the retail sector reported a 16% fall in half year profits. They blame a fall of 2% in prices caused by intense competition in the UK retail sector. This inevitably will have a knock on effect in the Scottish salmon industry as the UK market is, after all, their home and most important market. We, at Callander McDowell have already reported how salmon prices have fallen in UK supermarkets. However, whilst members of the EU Salmon Producers Group are unlikely to supply these larger players, prices in independent fishmongers are also under pressure as they try to remain partially competitive to the supermarkets. Most consumers will not pay three or four times the price of that in supermarkets just to buy from their local fishmongers. This means that the smaller producers will be just as much under pressure to keep prices low as the supermarkets. Sadly, as neither the European Salmon producers Group or DG Trade seem to know what is happening in the retail sector, their attempt to force prices up appears doomed. The inevitable outcome will be yet more market disruption. We can only hope that it will not last for a further fifteen years.

All at sea: Back in 2001, we at Callander McDowell discussed the opportunities presented by the development of open sea aquaculture, especially of salmon (see our archive – reLAKSation no 21). We believe that salmon offer the best opportunity for growing a low cost fish to meet the increasing consumer demand for a value for money meal choice. There are some aspects of salmon production which the industry has yet to exploit in commercial terms which can be met by moving off-shore. However, whilst we certainly believe that such a move must make economic sense, there are other benefits to be gained by taking fish production into less environmentally sensitive areas even though this is not dictated by the evidence. The salmon industry has to live and work in the real world and it would make sense to increase the distance from the environmental lobby.

Yet, we believe that a move offshore could show that the aquaculture industry also has a responsibility to the environment. Currently, there are a couple of hundred oil and gas installations in the North Sea which will need to be decommissioned. We believe that many could be reused as operational units for major offshore farms. These would work on an all in all out basis using redundant fishing vessels for harvesting. We believe that the technology exists to make this work now.

We have raised this issue again because a major conference will take place in Ireland on Oct 6th and 7th to discuss the whole concept of open sea farming. They hope to encourage the facilitation of large scale units producing over 10,000 tonnes or more per site. We certainly believe that this is possible, provided that there is both a market and a sound commercial rationale for production of such volumes. Rather than try to impose trade measures on existing production, we believe that the European Commission  through co-operation of its, fisheries, environmental and energy departments would be better employed in coordinating this form of development. Sadly, this seems unlikely. Meanwhile, a conference devoted to offshore farming is a positive first step. Once the conference has been reported in the press, we hope to discuss some of the issues raised.  For anyone interested, full details of the conference go to www.bim.ie , then click on Fishfarming and then click on Open Ocean Aquaculture Conference.               

Back to reLAKSation