Fraud may affect as much as 20 percent of the world’s seafood trade, according to a new report from the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
The report, “Food fraud in the fisheries and aquaculture sector,” reviewed how fraud occurs across seafood supply chains and examined how emerging analytical tools, including DNA testing, isotope analysis, and nuclear magnetic resonance, can help regulators detect mislabeling and other forms of deception.
It found that the global seafood sector is becoming increasingly vulnerable to fraud and that this susceptibility partly stems from inherent challenges associated with the trading of over 12,000 different species, such as the involvement of multiple inspection authorities across international supply chains.
The report asserted that the main drivers of fraud are economic and include practices such as species substitution, mislabeling, falsified sustainability claims, misrepresentation of origin or production method, and adulteration such as adding water or coloring to increase weight or enhance appearance.
In some cases, it noted, price differences between products can be substantial. For example, farmed sea bass marketed as locally caught in Italy can sell for two to three times the price of the same fish imported from Greece or Turkey.
Other fraudulent practices may also mask illegal fishing or catches exceeding quotas, posing risks to fishery sustainability, according to the report.
Citing previous analysis, the report advised that the probability of fraud is estimated at 20.6 percent and stated that this is significantly higher than meat (13.4 percent) and fruits and vegetables (10.4 percent).
It pointed to a global study conducted by nonprofit Oceana 10 years ago that found that one in five of over 25,000 seafood samples tested were mislabeled under the name of other species, with fraud occurring at every stage of the value chain. In that instance, cases were reported in 55 countries across all continents except Antarctica, with hake, escolar, and Asian catfish among the most substituted species.
Another analysis highlighted in the report found that in the European Union, one-third of mass caterers mislabeled seafood, and another found that fraud rates have risen as high as 75.5 percent in China, where over three-quarters of seafood was identified as species outside its expected family.
Tackling the problem will require smarter enforcement, better traceability, and stronger international coordination, rather than simply more testing, according to FAO Fisheries Officer Esther Garrido Gamarro, who told SeafoodSource these additional steps are critical to deterring fraud in a sector worth roughly USD 195 billion (EUR 167 billion) annually.
“Low inspection rates – sometimes below 1 percent of imports in large markets – inevitably raise questions about deterrence. That said, enforcement credibility does not depend solely on the volume of testing. Risk-based controls that target high-risk species, supply chains, and price anomalies can be more effective than random high-volume sampling,” Gamarro said.
Rather than a single global monitoring program, FAO envisions a coordinated system built around national inspection regimes, according to Gamarro.
“In practical terms, this would not take the form of a single, centrally run global study. Rather, it would likely consist of a framework through which national authorities integrate analytical techniques to fight fraud into their existing food control and fisheries inspection systems,” she said.
Such an approach, Gamarro added, could allow FAO to periodically aggregate national data and build a clearer global picture of seafood fraud trends.
“The key elements are intelligent targeting, credible traceability systems, meaningful sanctions, and a perception among operators that fraud is likely to be detected and punished,” she said. “There is no universal minimum inspection threshold that guarantees deterrence; what matters is whether enforcement strategies alter the risk-reward calculation that currently incentivizes economically motivated adulteration and misrepresentation.”
Although advanced laboratory techniques have significantly improved the ability to detect fraud in seafood supply chains, Gamarro emphasized the report’s finding that advanced authenticity tools can be costly and technically demanding.
“If deployed unevenly, they risk widening regulatory disparities between trading partners,” she said.
Instead, FAO is encouraging regional collaboration and shared laboratory capacity.
“The objective is not for every country to operate every high-end technology but to ensure that credible verification capacity exists within each trading region. Regional cooperation and South-South partnerships are particularly important to avoid a two-tier system of enforcement,” she said. “The objective would not be punitive but to close an enforcement gap that empirical studies consistently highlight.”
Among the report’s key recommendations is the harmonizing of seafood labeling rules globally, including requiring the use of scientific species names. However, achieving consensus among governments and industry may prove difficult, Gamarro conceded.
“The global seafood market encompasses more than 12,000 traded species, many of which have multiple common names across languages and regions, and some governments prefer nationally recognized common names for cultural or market reasons,” she said. “Commercial sensitivities and trade considerations remain practical constraints in achieving full harmonization.”
The report also highlighted several successful initiatives where DNA-based testing programs significantly reduced seafood mislabeling, but scaling those successes requires integrating testing into national food control systems, Gamarro explained.
“Pilot projects can demonstrate proof of concept, but lasting impact requires embedding these measures within national food control frameworks, securing sustainable funding, and ensuring that laboratory capacity is matched with enforcement authority,” she said. “Scaling is, therefore, less about replicating isolated projects and more about building durable governance infrastructure.”
