The "Mussel case-study": Overview of the European mussel farming and main issues at stake - "This project has received funding from the European ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
The “Mussel case-study”: Overview of
the European mussel farming and main
issues at stake
“This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation
programme under grant agreement No 635188”.
Summary
Overview of the European mussel farming industry and its competitive
environment
• Trends in production and evolution of the EU market share in world supply
• Main striking evolutions in terms of external trade (EU28 imports and exports)
• Structure of the EU mussel farming sector and indicators of profitability
Main issues at stake for the Mussel farming sector
• Bottlenecks identified by the participants
• Challenges as regards the development of sustainable European aquaculture
• Examples of room for improvement to be analysed within the SUCCESS project
2Evolution of the world supply of mussels (FAO Fishstat)
Evolution of mussel production worldwide
Top 10 Ranking thousand
2000
countries (volume) tonnes
1800
1600 China 1 806
thousand tonnes
1400 Chili 2 245
1200 Spain 3 221
1000
Thailand 4 127
800
600 New Zealand 5 98
400 France 6 81
200 Italy 7 79
0 Corean Rep. 8 58
1993
1994
1995
2013
2014
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Netherlands 9 54
Aquaculture Fisheries Danemark 10 43
Evolution of the aquaculture production of mussels from China, EU28 and Chile
3Main players of the European aquaculture supply of
mussels (FAO Fishstat)
100% 100%
90% Other 90%
80% 80%
IRL
70% 70%
60% UK
60%
50% GRE 50%
40% 40%
NDL
30%
FRA 30%
20%
20%
10% ITA
10%
0% SPA 0%
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
• In volume, Spain exceeded 40% of the EU28 production during the 2000-2014
period (in average)
• Top 4 producers (SPA, ITA, FRA, NDL) reached 82%
• In value, the share of the Top 4 is nearly the same, but the ranking is modified
(FRA, SPA, NDL, ITA) due to the higher valorisation of blue mussels
4Intra & Extra EU28 trade of mussels (Eurostat COMEXT)
• Supply deficit of the mussel EU28 market trade
• Very few Extra-EU28 exports but conversely increasing Extra-EU28 imports in
volume and value (line above)
• Exchange flows (imports) of mussels mainly at intra-EU level
5Intra & Extra EU28 imports of mussels by type of product
(Eurostat COMEXT)
IMPORT EXTRA EU28 (% in value) IMPORT INTRA EU28 (% in value)
100% 100%
90% 90%
Prepared or
80% 80%
preserved mussels
70% 70%
60% 60%
50% Mussels, frozen, 50%
40% dried, salted or in 40%
30% brine 30%
20% Live, fresh or chilled 20%
10% mussels 10%
0% 0%
2000
2012
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2013
2014
2015
• Extra-EU imports are exclusively made of processed mussel products (increase
of preserved mussels at the expense of other products)
• Intra UE trade is still dominated by live, fresh or chilled mussels
6Evolution of EU28 imports of prepared or preserved
mussels (Eurostat COMEXT)
EU28 Imports of prepared or preserved mussels EU28 imports of prepared or
140 preserved mussels in 2015
120
value (Million €)
100
80
23% Chile
60
40 1% other Extra
EU28
20
Intra EU28
0
76%
2012
2013
2014
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2015
Intra EU28 Extra EU29
• As concerns the supplying in preserved mussels, extra-EU imports have been
progressively expanding and competing with intra-EU imports
• Chile became the leader with 76% of the market share of EU28 imports of preserved
mussels in 2015
7Main importing countries of live, fresh or chilled mussels
(Eurostat COMEXT)
Main importing countries (volume) Main importing countries (value)
100% 100%
80% Others 80%
60% NDL 60%
ITA
40% 40%
GER
20% FRA 20%
BEL
0% 0%
2004
2012
2000
2001
2002
2003
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2013
2014
2015
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
• For the bulk of the intra-EU market (live, fresh or chilled mussels), the main
importing countries in volume are France, Italy and Belgium while in value
Belgium represents the main outlet, followed by France
8Main exporting countries of live, fresh or chilled mussels
(Eurostat COMEXT)
Main exporting countries (volume) Main exporting countries (value)
100% 100%
Others
80% 80%
UK
60% 60%
GRE
40% IRL 40%
DNK
20% 20%
SPA
0% NDL 0%
2009
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2005
2012
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2013
2014
2015
3,50
3,00 SPA
Export price (€/kg)
2,50 NDL
2,00 DNK
1,50 IRL
1,00 GRE
0,50 UK
0,00
Others
9Structure and employment of the main Mussel farming segments
(STECF aquaculture data – average 2013/2014)
ITA Long-line
NDL Bottom FRA Bottom SPA Raft
(2013)
Number of enterprises 56 285 2 034 159
Number of employees na 1 819 8 600 996
Number of FTE 154 1 077 2 312 829
Total mussel sales (tonnes) 41 812 59 155 190 062 67 385
Mussel price indicator 1,40 1,87 0,50 0,73
Number of FTE/enterprises 2,8 3,8 1,1 5,2
ratio Employees/FTE na 1,7 3,7 1,2
Total mussel sales/FTE (tonnes) 272 55 82 81
Total value of assets/FTE (1000 €) 545 181 95 68
• Mussel farming in the Top4 EU producer countries relies on different species & production
system
• Higher valorization for blue mussels than for Mediterranean mussels
• More capital intensive PS, more concentrated production in the Netherlands
• High level of employment, pluriactivity and part-time jobs in Spain (labour intensive PS)
10Cost structure of the main Mussel farming segments
(STECF aquaculture data – average 2013/2014 except for Italy)
Spanish Raft segment Netherlands - Bottom segment
(culture on bottom in deep water)
Energy costs
-1%5%
3%
7% Raw material costs:
19% 5% Livestock costs 8% 11%
5%
Repair and maintenance 6%
Labour (Wages and 12%
salaries + imputed value)
Other operational costs 35%
62%
Depreciation of capital 24%
Financial costs, net
Italy - Long line Segment (2013) France - Bottom segment
(bouchot culture)
Energy costs
8% 2% 6% Raw material costs:
Livestock costs 4% 3% 6%
8%
Repair and maintenance
5%
31%
Labour (Wages and salaries 32%
+ imputed value)
Other operational costs
39% 5% 33%
Depreciation of capital
Financial costs, net 17%
11Labour productivity and remuneration of work
(STECF Aquaculture data 2013/2014)
300 300
250 250
200 200
150 150
100 100
50 50
0 0
NDL bottom FRA bouchot SPA raft ITA LL 2013
GVA/FTE (1000 €) Mean wages/FTE (1000 €)
sales volume/FTE (T)
12Mussel farming case-study
Context /Background
• On the supply side: slightly downward trend in the European production (trend
even more marked in recent years)
• Increasing deficit of the EU mussel market, but on processed products only
• On the demand side, outlooks of growth remain significant (consumer demand
for affordable fresh/processed seafood produced by low-input aquaculture)
• Increasing demand for organic products
• Increasing demand for new valued-added products
13Mussel farming case study
• Bottlenecks identified by Mussel CS participants
– Environmental: water quality degradation, epizootic events, climatic factors, blooms of
toxic phytoplankton, red tides, natural competitors…
– Regulation and governance: difficult access to new farming sites or to the renewal of
existing sites, insecure production rights, increasing use conflicts …
– Structural/Economics: lack of professionalization of the activity, insufficient
organisation of producers, lack of integration of dispatch/purification centres, lack of
outlets on the domestic market…
– Marketing: Insufficient valorisation of mussels at the production stage could also be
considered as a bottleneck in some countries.
14Mussel farming case study
General challenges
– Reducing the factor of profitability decrease due to environmental concerns or/and to
unsustainable cultural practices, in particular via co-management systems
– Improving valorisation and consolidating the market power of producers along the
value chain, for instance through the setting up of producer organisation or/and the
involvement in labelling approaches
– General objectives have been defined in national strategic plans for aquaculture
(simplification of administrative procedure, conditions of access to new sites and spatial
planning tools…) but depend on priorities attributed to the shellfish farming sector in
different countries
15SUCCESS Mussel CS: Focus on « room for improvement »
The RFI which have been identified for further analysis are:
• Greece, ATEITH: Development of new products (unvalved mussels with extended lifespan) for
targeting both traditional markets in consuming areas (i.e. Thessaloniki) and other areas with
high potential due to tourism (i.e. Crete).
• Greece, ATEITH: Assessing consumer preferences in terms of certification- labelling through
choice experiments. Preferences of producer certification (Organic) versus Retail certification
(own retailer standards) versus No certification will be tested along with domestic origin, EU
origin and Non EU origin.
• Italy, NISEA : Influence of labelling (PDO Scardovari) on the primary sector and on the
coordination of the value chain (opportunities for the producers to sell their mussels in
different ways, with or without label)
• France, IFREMER: Valorisation of quality and environmental attributes of mussel farming in the
Norman-Breton Gulf through voluntary labelling approach (PDO, organic label) and through
regulatory tools (co-management).
16You can also read
