Thanks! Appreciate your thoughtful reply, especially on mackerel/herring.
I don’t think stress duration itself changes the overall conclusions of this work, especially as my best guess is that increasing human (food) demand for sardines/anchovies might not counterfactually increase catch volumes for these species (unless it increases political pressure for increased quotas).
That said, I remain pretty uncertain about what the consequences of pushing up demand for these species might be. On the one hand, it could push up prices for fishmeal, which in turn could raise input prices for aquaculture for carnivorous/omnivious species. But on the other hand, it could also push up prices for sardines/anchovies, which in turn could push omnivores/pesceterians who currently eat sardines/anchovies to eat other foods. Those second-round effects seem pretty hard to know with confidence, but seems pretty plausible those folks could switch from anchovies/sardines to farmed salmon/shrimp or land-based meats like chicken.
I agree with your point on catch volumes. Though I do hope I’ll find a fisheries expert to evaluate this quota claim properly, as it seems so critical.
Regarding your second point, I don’t share all your concerns about the second-order consequences. Sardines and anchovies are currently used primarily as low-value inputs for fishmeal. The margins of sardines and anchovies for human consumption exceed that of fishmeal, so reallocating catch to human diets would likely not change the price.
Frozen sardines in the UK are currently priced slightly below chicken per gram of protein while also providing valuable EPA/DHA (canned sardines are a bit pricier due to packaging and processing costs).
For salmon or shrimp, their dependence on fish meal would make them more expensive were sardines/anchovies to shift to human consumption, making them less appealing substitutes.
Thanks for all your input :) Really appreciate it!
Thanks! Appreciate your thoughtful reply, especially on mackerel/herring.
I don’t think stress duration itself changes the overall conclusions of this work, especially as my best guess is that increasing human (food) demand for sardines/anchovies might not counterfactually increase catch volumes for these species (unless it increases political pressure for increased quotas).
That said, I remain pretty uncertain about what the consequences of pushing up demand for these species might be. On the one hand, it could push up prices for fishmeal, which in turn could raise input prices for aquaculture for carnivorous/omnivious species. But on the other hand, it could also push up prices for sardines/anchovies, which in turn could push omnivores/pesceterians who currently eat sardines/anchovies to eat other foods. Those second-round effects seem pretty hard to know with confidence, but seems pretty plausible those folks could switch from anchovies/sardines to farmed salmon/shrimp or land-based meats like chicken.
I agree with your point on catch volumes. Though I do hope I’ll find a fisheries expert to evaluate this quota claim properly, as it seems so critical.
Regarding your second point, I don’t share all your concerns about the second-order consequences. Sardines and anchovies are currently used primarily as low-value inputs for fishmeal. The margins of sardines and anchovies for human consumption exceed that of fishmeal, so reallocating catch to human diets would likely not change the price.
Frozen sardines in the UK are currently priced slightly below chicken per gram of protein while also providing valuable EPA/DHA (canned sardines are a bit pricier due to packaging and processing costs).
For salmon or shrimp, their dependence on fish meal would make them more expensive were sardines/anchovies to shift to human consumption, making them less appealing substitutes.
Thanks for all your input :) Really appreciate it!