FISHERY STATISTICS

(Item 10 of the agenda)

119. The commission was informed that a sound statistical system required for proper evaluation of the performance of inland fisheries should: (a) ensure that appropriate indicators could be constructed from raw data for monitoring the sustainability of fishery development; (b) provide an estimate of fishing effort; (c) include complex data not exclusively of biological nature to take into account social and economic factors influencing fisheries; (d) provide information on the environment and bio-diversity for their conservation; (e) separate inland capture fisheries production from fish farming and other aquaculture practices for better monitoring of trends and requirements in inland fish supply and economic performance, for better fishery and aquaculture management; and (f) include an inventory of waterbodies.

120. The commission noted that most member countries were providing official data to FAO with only a small proportion of inland capture production requiring FAO estimation. It, however, took note of the inadequacies in the information which included: (a) insufficient breakdown by species of reported fish capture statistics and difficulties in the implementation of a standard species classification system; (b) lack of uniformity in the definition of the scope of inland fisheries; (c) lack of regularity in data collection and (d) inadequacies in coverage, content and disaggregation. It appreciated the inclusion of the information on suggested data items to be collected for inland fisheries including the variations in the methodologies used in the region for collecting this information.

121. The commission noted the importance of establishing frames for undertaking inland fisheries sample surveys. In some countries, population and agriculture census frames were already integrating some fishery concerns. These were not however, up to the level of differentiating between marine and inland environments. In some countries the use of agriculture census listing was not possible because farmers did not engage in fishing. In others, where licensing was compulsory, listings of fishers and fish pond operators could be generated from Government registers. The commission also noted that even if listings could be obtained as by-products of governments’ regulatory functions, their maintenance could still be costly. The generation of inland fishery statistics could even draw heavily on available local resources due to complex data demands and would have implications on the frequency of data collection. Thus, even if the survey could be kept simple, collection of data on such variables as fishing grounds, gears used, efforts and seasonality would widen the scope and coverage of the survey.

122. The commission further noted that validation of fishery production statistics might, from time to time, require the conduct of consumption surveys; these surveys however did not permit validation of data in respect of seasonality and method of production. It also noted that due to the nature of inland fisheries and aquaculture, there was not one single method of data collection that could be efficiently used; instead, a combination of methods according to specific needs was usually employed. Inland and aquaculture data collection methodology through objective area measurement and yield estimation would benefit from the agriculture experience in similar undertaking. Moreover, while market surveys generally provided reliable trend indications, they could not be relied upon to estimate total production levels due to non-inclusion of production used for home-consumption. It was suggested that household socio-economic surveys could provide valuable information for estimating adjustment factor(s) to account for such undercoverage.

123. The commission was informed that biological, social and economic inland fishery data were becoming increasingly critical in view of increased attention to environmental issues. However, it was noted that collection of such information was requiring more budgetary allocation compared with current fisheries data collection.

124. Improvements at international level included the further promotion of the harmonization of the definition of aquaculture, the systematic separation of data for inland fishery and aquaculture, the design of a more appropriate form to report inland fishery production, and the adaptation to inland fisheries surveys of a software developed for marine fisheries.

125. The commission concurred with the observation that much more work would be needed to improve the quality and quantity of inland fisheries statistics. It recommended that member countries paid particular attention to: (a) improved coordination of national statistical programmes to ensure the appropriate coverage of inland fisheries in relevant agricultural and rural household surveys between responsible agencies; (b) systematic application of sampling techniques in commercial capture fisheries and aquaculture and the use of occasional surveys for estimating semi-commercial and subsistence fishing production component; (c) improved information basis for conservation and management decisions concerning fishery and aquaculture and their interactions with the ecosystem; and (d) well-focused technical assistance programmes specifically addressing identified problems of the national information system for inland fisheries.