Shunji Murakami is on a mission to expand the sustainability of seafood in the world’s most seafood-loving country.
The Japan Program Director for Ocean Outcomes, Murakami is a firm believer in working within existing systems to produce gradual, incremental improvements to the way Japan’s fisheries are managed.
Portland, Oregon, U.S.A.-based Ocean Outcomes was spun off from the Wild Salmon Center in February 2015. The Wild Salmon Center had launched a Fisheries Improvement Project (FIP) for Hokkaido chum salmon in order to qualify the fishery for Marine Stewardship Council certification. Sensing a possible opportunity to focus more on sustainability initiatives in Japanese fishing, Ocean Outcomes was formed to expand the scope of the organization beyond salmon. Today, it receives the majority of its financial support – around 90 percent – from the Packard Foundation and the Walton Foundation, while its remaining funding comes from grants and funds and subsidies.
The group’s primary expertise is in FIPs. In Japan, besides the aforementioned chum salmon project, it is currently managing three other active projects: Wakayama albacore tuna, Tokyo Bay sea perch (in the MSC pre-assessment stage), and Aomori amberjack (in development). It is also close to initiating an Aquaculture Improvement Project (AIP) with a company that owns multiple farms.
The goal of each FIP is ultimately to bring a fishery up to MSC’s “unconditional pass” level, said Murakami, who works out of the organization’s Tokyo office. Ocean Outcomes follows the Conservation Alliance for Seafood Solutions guidelines, and it has signed a Memorandum of Understanding with MSC on how to cooperate.
Yet, in conversation, Murakami seemed relatively unconcerned that MSC certification lags in Japan, given that it is in competition with Japan’s less stringent, but cheaper and domestically run Marine Eco-Label (MEL) program. He is also not particularly pushing the individual transferable quota (ITQ) system currently championed by the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the U.S.A.
“TAC and ITQ are one good option,” Murakami said, adding, “We don’t do specific advocacy. We don’t copy and paste success stories. We work on communication. We start with building trust.”
Murakami said it’s important to keep in mind the cultural context surrounding traditional fisheries systems in Japan, including a well-entrenched system of local fishery cooperatives that have community-based fishing rights and that do a good deal of self-regulation.
Also, Japan does not historically have a “resource-based management system,” he said. For example, most species are managed with a Total Allowable Effort (TAE) approach, but for the few species that have a TAC, the TAC is set far above the actual catch in recent years, so it is effectively meaningless.
Instead of a resource-based management system, Japan emphasizes the socio-economic aspect of the fishery. This means keeping jobs in the small fishing communities. In order for it to be effective, fishermen have to see a FIP as a benefit to them.
“It’s a business decision for the fishermen,” he said.
In looking to create and manage FIPs in Japan, Murakami said there has to be a balance between the short-term and long-term approaches. Ocean Outcomes begins by working with local fishermen and communities to build awareness, gather data and finally to implement FIPs.
Regarding his organization’s relation with the Japanese government, he said the concept of the NGO is not accepted as much in Japan as in Europe and the U.S.
“We want them to see us more as a partner in Fishery Improvement Projects. We don’t want to be seen as a lobbyist. There has been good enough external pressure. The natural response is to push back,” he said. “This shows the need for a bottom-up approach—building relationships, trust, and getting fishermen on board for improving sustainable practice.”
He thinks that Ocean Outcomes and the Japanese fisheries managers can work together. For example, there are 53 species in Japan for which the stocks are evaluated by stock assessments and some of these are prepared by regional fishery organizations and the information is not always available to the public, especially in English.
They also operate with limited resources and budget. Ocean Outcomes can help with data collection, for example on by-catch, or with sampling. These are small steps, but Murakami said, “Small steps can be really important for success in a fishery.”
So then, how does he define success? After all, there is no profit motive, and he seems undeterred, even if an FIP does not ultimately result in MSC certification.
“As with our name, ‘Ocean Outcomes,’ it means changes on the water. Building relationships to carry out what they haven’t discussed before. It starts with the assessment, and we design what information they need, so they can imagine it together.”
And he has hopes that interest can ride the tailwind of the 2020 Olympics, which will take place in Tokyo, because the procurement policy decided by the Olympic Committee decision is to support MSC-ASC, MEL-AEL and FIP-AIP.
