Español

When it comes to transforming our food systems from an ethical perspective, it’s important to understand how the food industry functions by mapping its size, impact, and the actors and institutions involved. This includes acknowledging the cultural roots of food, including cultural production, traditions, and consumption patterns. 

In Chile, as in many other parts of the world, animals kept for food are subject to what’s called the “animal-industrial complex” — in other words, institutionalized and systematic exploitation that becomes seen as normal in society. In this two-part blog series, I’ll be unveiling the operations of the largest animal exploitation industries in Chile over the past 20 years (between 2002-2022), starting with the fishing industry and then, in part two, with the livestock industry.

The Law & The Sea

To comprehend how the fishing industry functions in Chile, it’s important to look at the influence of the law, which favors economic interests and ocean exploitation. 

Fishing in Chile has historical ties to its geography, cultural traditions, and politics. The national coastline stretches approximately 4,270 kilometers, making it one of the world’s longest coastlines with privileged access to the Pacific Ocean. In the 1980s, under the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet, a national law was passed granting Chile exclusive sovereign rights over the Chilean continental shelf to conserve, explore, or exploit its natural resources. 

Thus, the State asserts itself as sovereign (though bound by international law under necessary circumstances), with the authority to carry out ecological philanthropy (in the best-case scenario), scientific research, and the instrumentalization of aquatic life for profit — all under the category of “natural resources.” In turn, calling all aquatic plants and animals “natural resources” enables people to treat them with social and moral indifference.

Towards 1989, on the cusp of Chile’s return to democracy, the General Fisheries and Aquaculture Law was enacted (Law No. 18.892), forming the basis for all regulations governing economic activity. But, to better understand the last 10 years of fishing in Chile, it is necessary to mention the 2013 Fishing Law (Law No. 20.657), the most recent, technical, and controversial.

Firstly, it should be noted that this law was promoted during episodes of bribery and corruption involving the national political elite, including at least one politician who was later imprisoned for corruption as well as three major fishing industry players who stood to benefit from it: the Corporación Pesquera del Norte (CORPESCA), the Association of Industrial Fisheries (ASIPES), and the company FRIOSUR. For example, the law had strategically drafted sections limiting artisanal fishing and specifying that fishing licenses would have a duration of 20 years, with the possibility of indefinite renewal. This would have an impact on marine life and furthered political-economic tensions as it continued to favor the business elite and their industrial ships.

The 2013 law reaffirms Chile’s sovereignty while modernizing the language used in the previous law. Instead of “natural resources,” the law discusses Chile’s right to regulate “hydrobiological resources and their ecosystems” in designated nautical areas. Initially, the law seems to be focused on sustainability. However, it is also accompanied by an extensive article about catch quotas, granting temporary fishing licenses for a period of 20 years. 

Therefore, despite aiming for sustainability through precaution and an ecosystem-based approach, the law ensured private sector exploitation for two decades, with the possibility of renewal. To this day, in practice, the law favors the identification of fisheries rich in “hydrobiological resources” and their subsequent exploitation by private actors with the resources and technology to do so, resulting in economic concentration within the industrial fishing sector. 

This sector is dominated by the so-called “7 families” that are “owners of the Chilean sea” through economic groups with significant stakes. These families include Angelini and Lecaros linked to CORPESCA S.A. and Orizon S.A., Yaconi-Santa Cruz and Sarquis linked to Blumar S.A., Fernández and Stengel linked to Camanchaca S.A., and Izquierdo linked to Invermar S.A.

In Chile, there is a common phrase that goes: “Once the law is made, the trap is made.”

Fishing And Aquaculture Productive Matrix

The administration of Chilean fishing is under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Economy, Development, and Tourism, through the Undersecretariat of Fisheries and Aquaculture, the National Fisheries and Aquaculture Service, and the National Institute for the Sustainable Development of Artisanal Fisheries and Small-Scale Aquaculture. These organizations oversee the country’s “hydrobiological resources.” 

Below, I will detail some key aspects of the three fishing subsectors (artisanal fishing, industrial fishing, and aquaculture) focused on the workforce, the landing of tons, and major processing lines.

Understanding The Workforce

Artisanal fishing consists of fishing, collecting coastal resources, diving, and even small-scale aquaculture in designated “management areas” granted to the artisanal sector. To engage in this economic activity, individuals must be registered in the Artisanal Fishing Registry (RPA), which includes the Artisanal Organizations Registry (ROA).

The table below breaks down the distribution of the artisanal labor market in 2022, broken down by macrozone:

Industrial fishing is composed of technological vessels measuring 18 meters and above, which are owned by individuals and legal entities that must register in the Industrial Fishing Registry (RPI). The Undersecretariat of Fisheries and Aquaculture highlights the Association of Northern Industrial Fishers (ASIPNOR), the Group of Southern Austral Industrial Fisheries (FIPES), the Association of Industrial Fishers (ASIPES), and the National Fishing Society (SONAPESCA) as the main industrial fishing associations in Chile. The table below breaks down the total Industrial Fishing Registry (RPI) registrations in 2022:

As Table 2 shows, the corporate sector represents 78% of the industrial fishing sector in terms of registrations.

Finally, authorized aquaculture operators are registered in the National Aquaculture Registry (RNA). Out of a total of 3,295 concessions, 2,156 are concentrated in the southern macrozone. Additionally, 2,258 concessions are granted to companies or other forms of legal entities, while 1,037 belong to individuals. As indicated in Table 3, there were 10,719 workers registered in 2022 (80% men and 20% women), with 30% of them being temporary workers.

Having examined the three subsectors, we can begin to understand how the human workforce is a crucial factor in their profits. Unfortunately, the working human population is also treated as a resource in the animal exploitation complex, meaning that animal exploitation industries also exploit human labor to serve their interests. 

Tonnage Landing

“Tonnage landing” refers to the total weight of marine catches brought ashore at a certain location. From 2002-2022, 89,362,659 total tons were landed, including 8,374,091 tons of seaweed and 80,988,568 tons of marine organisms (70,235,661 tons of fish and 9,287,854 tons of mollusks). I’ve included seaweed because they are an important product of the fishing industry, consumed either directly or indirectly through cosmetic, gastronomy, pharmaceutical, and other products. Additionally, seaweed are part of the marine/sub-aquatic forest, and their extraction affects the rest of the ecosystem. 

Figure 1 shows the progression of annual tons landed over 20 years, broken down by species. The graph allows us to observe the peak of fish landings in 2004 when 5,176,071 tons were caught. From there, a slow decline occurred until it reached its lowest point in 2016, with “only” 1,928,598 tons, then gradually increased to the 3,096,605 tons recorded in 2022. 

The numbers seen between 2002 and 2008 cannot be reached again. The decline was associated with increased restrictions in fishing due to overexploitation and the fear of extinction of certain species. However, no matter how optimistic the State and the Undersecretariat of Fisheries and Aquaculture may be, evidence indicates that, by 2022, 14% of marine fisheries are considered underexploited, 28.5% are in full exploitation, and 57% are already overexploited or collapsed. 

It is also evident from Figure 1 that as the capture and landing of fish decreases over the years, the capture and landing of mollusks and crustaceans grow. In 2022, the total volume reached 4.2 million tons of multispecies, which is still far from the 6 million tons of multispecies recorded at the peak in 2004. 

It’s essential to note that artisanal fishing and aquaculture in the fish and mollusk sectors significantly contribute to the global catch in tons. However, industrial fishing has experienced a decline in catch tons in recent years due to the collapse and overexploitation of fisheries ecosystems. Government-imposed “bans” are also in place to give marine species, considered resources, ample time for their reproductive cycles.

Main Species Landed

Tables 4 and 5 show the total proportion of the most-landed fish and mollusk species over 20 years. They show, for example, a decline in the number of anchovies landed, which means we are witnessing their disappearance due to exploitation. However, we should also note that anchovies are used for the production of fishmeal, which has seen a decrease in production over the years. 

This contrasts with the increase in the tonnage of Atlantic salmon landed, a species that is part of the export aquaculture industry. In fact, products from the extractive sector (artisanal and industrial) averaged $2.40 USD/kg in 2022, while in the aquaculture sector, the average was $7.90 USD/kg.

This gives us a clear idea of the market value and the prolific growth of aquaculture production. It’s estimated that in 2022, the artisanal and industrial subsectors earned $1.623 USD billions for a total volume of 693.7 thousand tons, while the aquaculture sector reached $7.174 USD billions associated with 910.9 thousand tons. 

While anchovies (27.97%) and jack mackerels (22.16%) were the most landed species over 20 years, catches of both species halved between 2002 and 2022. Meanwhile, Atlantic salmon (14.12%) has almost tripled in tonnage between 2002 and 2022, while common sardines (13.52%) maintained relatively consistent figures, except for the significant peak in 2012 that brought it close to a million tons annually.

Regarding mollusks, mussels (55.5%) and cuttlefish (29.5%) were the most landed in Chilean ports over 20 years, marginalizing the capture and landing of other mollusk species. Mussel landing increased tenfold over the 20-year period compared to 2002, while cuttlefish increased seventeen-fold. It’s worth noting that mussel landing has increased significantly due to the mass cultivation of mussels within national aquaculture facilities.

Total Tonnage Landed By Subsector

Table 6 and Figure 2 show a five-year comparative analysis of the three subsectors that make up the national fishing industry. It’s clear that artisanal fishing plays a crucial role by extracting the highest total tons of multiple species, exceeding 1,700,000 tons in both 2012 and 2022. At the same time, industrial fishing has seen a decrease in its landings over the years. In 2012, they reported a catch of 1,210,003 tons of multiple species, and in 2017 and 2022, the figure was around 850,000 tons.

Unfortunately, this reduction in industrial extraction is “compensated” by the exploitation coming from aquaculture facilities, which are reaching increasingly higher totals, approaching the levels of artisanal fishing. It can be observed that between 2012 and 2017, there was a 10% increase in the tonnage, while between 2017 and 2022, the increase was 25%.

Total Production 2002 – 2022

Beyond catching marine animals, the fishing industry is also responsible for creating “products” from “raw materials.” In other words, each plant and animal body landed goes to processing industries that transform it according to various markets. In Chile, there are 14 production lines: fresh-chilled, frozen, surimi, dried salted, wet salted, smoked, canned, fishmeal, oil, agar-agar, dried seaweed, dehydrated, alginate, carrageenan, and collagen.

Over 20 years, there were four major processing lines for marine animals. As seen in Table 7, between 2002 and 2022, the most prolific industry in terms of tons of production was the fishmeal industry, followed by the frozen products industry, the chilled products industry, and the canned products industry. Furthermore, Table 7 shows that fishes were the most commonly used species across all four types of production.

Other important highlights from the processing sector include the following:

• The canned products industry reached almost 300,000 tons in 2002. Then, between 2003 and 2009, it remained at 100,000 tons before decreasing to a production level equivalent to less than 50,000 tons for 12 years between 2010 and 2022.
• Between 2002 and 2008, production of fresh chilled products increased from around 100,000 tons to approximately 250,000 tons. It reached a peak in 2017, exceeding 700,000 tons of production. After that, there was a decrease, and production figures remained around 600,000 tons until 2022.
• Frozen product production, despite fluctuations, has remained relatively consistent. However, since 2011, there has been a production increase, hovering around 600,000 tons. In 2022, production exceeded 800,000 tons.
• Finally, fishmeal production exceeded 800,000 tons in 2002, with a peak in 2004 when production surpassed 1,000,000 tons. There has been a continuous decline since then, with production consistently below 400,000 tons from 2013 onwards to the present day.

To complement the above, in Table 10 and Figure 7 we can see the four major processing lines in a frame of 10 years, where there is a decline in fishmeal production, with a total reduction of 29%. In contrast, the frozen production increased by 48.5% and the fresh product industry increased production by 34%. Meanwhile, the canned product industry remained relatively stable but with a decrease of 8% in 2022 compared to 2017.

Final Reflections

I would like to emphasize that fishing culture and tradition precede legal norms in Chile. However, it is the law that generates the regulations and promotes economic activity. As we have seen, the current law is deeply flawed in its origin. It also attempts to give a sustainability spin to an extractive activity that has, to date, depleted marine life to the extent that over half of the so-called “Chilean fisheries” (marine ecosystems with a rich circulation of species) are depleted/devastated due to exploitation.

Moreover, it’s crucial to highlight the collective nature of Chile’s fishing industry, involving both workers and business owners in artisanal and industrial subsectors. These groups use collective action to mobilize political and economic demands against the State, the administrator of “hydrobiological resources.” This collective action includes pressure groups, urban protests, and lobbying within the National Congress and the Undersecretariat of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

The concentration of capital behind the industry is a defining factor that needs to be explored in detail. With fishing quotas to meet and profits to cover, large companies form a fishing oligopoly that extends beyond the use of industrial vessels in deep waters. They also rely on artisanal fleets, which serve the interests of large industries, not just the local communities they are part of. It’s worth mentioning that these same companies in the oligopoly have investments, ownership, and share participation in scientific subsidiaries that promote scientific research on the sea, its ecosystems, species, and the most suitable methods for fishing and aquaculture. 

In other words, the concentration of business capital also implies a concentration of scientific entities that generate knowledge in favor of industrial efficiency, creating inequality in terms of access to and development of scientific knowledge within each subsector. This is particularly dangerous because science and technology are placed at the service of a minority group, giving them added value to their business operations and strategically positioning them above the rest of the actors, both economically and in political lobbying. These factors together exacerbate the depletion of marine creatures and the destruction of ecosystems.

In parallel, the technical-business development of the aquaculture sector is increasingly concerning. The intensive breeding of marine species has serious consequences, similar to intensive breeding of mammals or birds on land. It is known that captive salmon in aquaculture centers are preyed upon by marine parasites, and their precarious conditions of overcrowding force business owners to inject tons of antibiotics to ensure a higher survival rate. 

However, problems are mounting. Seabed pollution and water degradation destroy complex underwater ecosystems where aquaculture cages are installed. Likewise, massive escapes of thousands of farmed fish pose risks to native saltwater and freshwater food chains, as fish farming often involves the introduction of non-native, exotic, or invasive species compared to the local fauna. Despite all this and recognizing the severity of the environmental impact of aquaculture centers in southern and austral Chile, experiments with multi-trophic aquaculture centers are underway. As a result, we are witnessing increasing technological advancement and territorial expansion.

Regarding the above, in my opinion, there is a growing indifference toward marine animal and plant life. The intensification of industrial and artisanal fishing goes hand-in-hand with a narrative based on economic progress. The growth of aquaculture centers represent an attractive industry not only for entrepreneurs but also for coastal, rural, and southern communities. They see it as an opportunity to achieve greater socioeconomic well-being, but this also ties them closer to exploitative animal industries, leading them to integrate these industries into their culture, lives, and identities.

Let us remember that all actors involved in the fishing industry advocate for conservation (for example by collaborating with government funds and operating research centers). The global trend promotes sustainability as a symbol. However, both concepts are seen as inferior to economic development, leading to the “inevitable” perception of animal and plant life as “resources” to be used and exploited for the benefit of Chileans or the Chilean economy. This worldview is also shared by universities, academics, and research centers, even when they seek to incorporate an ecological perspective in their research.

I believe that countering the fishing and aquaculture industry in Chile entails advocating for the transformation of the current sociopolitical, socioeconomic, and sociocultural structures in the region. This can be divided into two major dimensions:

On one hand, there is a need to raise awareness regarding the environmental degradation, animal exploitation, and the exploitation of human communities associated with these industries. This means exposing and condemning the exploitation of animals, humans, and the environment. It also involves creating multimedia educational platforms with high aesthetic-cultural value, easily accessible to different age groups. Central to these platforms is the moral value of animals and our relationships with them. Additionally, it requires identifying the territories most closely linked to and dependent on these industries.

On the other hand, recognizing the challenges of competing with well-established animal exploitation industries, we must instigate cultural change aligned with ethical-political perspectives. This includes actions like organizing local alternative vegan trade fairs, educational activities, funding projects, and institutional lobbying for investment in agriculture and emerging alternative industries. The aim is to transform societal relationships, the productive and labor sectors, and our consumption patterns, fostering coexistence for the collective good among species.