[SPONSORED] Japanese marine products, including whales, have been supplied by the fisheries that Japanese fishermen have been operating in the waters surrounding Japan, which are rich in marine resources. These waters surrounding Japan are rich in whale species and abundance, even from a global perspective. They are one of the three major fishing grounds in the world.
Last of three parts
Part 1: Whales in the Context of Food Security
Part 2: Getting to Food Security with More Variety in Food Sources
Japan’s Rich Waters
It was natural and inevitable that whaling was practiced in the fishing industry developed in Japan. The country’s fish-eating and whale-eating culture developed intrinsically. It can be said that the supply of a variety of marine products, including whales, from the surrounding waters has made it possible for a world-class population density to live in a small area of land. This was at least partially due to the presence of a variety of marine products.
Quantitatively speaking, if whale eating were to disappear due to the anti-whaling movement, the negative impact on food security would be very small. Moreover, it would likely be limited only to particular regions. However, its symbolic significance is a threat to global food security.
In the name of global standards, the use of various wild animals, including whales, as food is being denied. The idea of protecting pristine nature is not wrong, but if, as a result, developing countries and local residents living adjacent to rich natural environments are restricted or denied access to food and other sources of livelihood from that nature, their lives will be dependent on what happens in the outside world. This makes them vulnerable in terms of food security.
Of course, the use of natural resources must be sustainable. Overfishing must not be allowed.
However, it is one thing to say that whales are special animals and therefore not even one should be taken. It is quite another to restrict the hunting of whales to prevent overhunting. Is it really acceptable to deny the sustainable use of natural resources under the concept of protecting pristine nature?
Risk In Globalization
Globalization of the food supply presents another problem. It invokes the environmental impact of producing, transporting, and also distributing food.
For example, when beef from the United States is imported and eaten in Japan, more than 20 times the amount of energy is used per kilocalorie of beef. To increase the weight of a cow by one kilogram, 11 kilograms of feed must be fed. And farmland, water, fertilizers, and pesticides are needed to produce the grain and other materials that feed the cow.
About half of the farmland in the United States is used to produce livestock feed. For US beef to be consumed in Japan, it must be transported enormous distances. That increases emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, along with fuel consumption by ships and airplanes. If all of these factors are included in the calculation, the energy consumption would increase by a factor of 20 or more.
Food Security and ‘Food Mileage’
Another indicator of the environmental impact of food is food mileage. This indicator is calculated based on the amount of food transported and the distance traveled. Since it reflects carbon dioxide emissions, it represents the burden on the global environment.
According to figures from 2001, Japan’s food mileage is the highest in the world. It totals 900.2 billion tons/km, according to estimates by the National Institute of Agricultural and Forestry Policy, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of Japan. Per capita, the figure is 7039 tons/km.
In the case of the United States, the total amount is 295.8 billion ton-km and the per capita amount is 1051 ton-km, which are one-third and one-seventh of Japan’s food mileages, respectively.
Even in the case of the United Kingdom, a European country not blessed with as much land as the United States, the total amount of food mileage is 187.9 billion ton-km, or 3195 ton-km per capita, far less environmentally burdensome than that of Japan. Japan, with its low food self-sufficiency ratio, is placing an enormous burden on the global environment by relying on imported food.
Making A Smaller Carbon Footprint
On the other hand, the amount of carbon dioxide emitted when whales are taken for food in the waters surrounding Japan is about 2.5 kg per kilogram per 1 kg of whale meat, according to a 2009 estimate by the Fisheries Research Agency (now the Japan Fisheries Research and Education Agency). Even in the case of whale meat from research whaling in the Antarctic Ocean, the carbon dioxide emissions are only about 3 kg. This is less than one-tenth of the amount emitted by the same calculation for importing and eating US beef.
This figure makes sense since whales feed and grow on their own. And whaling operations only consume enough energy to unload whales from the waters around Japan to Japanese ports after capture. Again, we have no intention of claiming that eating whale meat will ensure food security. It is simply an example of the difference in environmental impact between imported food and food that Japan can secure on its own.
Therefore, from the perspective of reducing the global environmental burden, it is necessary to increase Japan’s ability to produce its own food on its own land and in the surrounding waters. In other words, Japan needs to become as self-sufficient as possible in food production.
The invasion of Ukraine and the COVID-19 pandemic may be only temporary incidents from the perspective of a long historical perspective. However, the current world situation shows that incidents with a similar impact on the world’s food supply will undoubtedly occur again.
Even if they do not occur, the environmental burden related to food security should be reduced. Moreover, the resilience of stable food supplies against unforeseen circumstances should be enhanced by ensuring the diversity of food ingredients and promoting local production for local consumption.
Whale in Japan’s Rich Food Culture
In Japan, whales also form a rich food culture with different histories of their use, whale species used, and processing and cooking methods depending on the region. In many regions of the world, too, there is a history of using marine mammals. They include whales as food and a unique food culture. To say that all of these are barbaric and should be stopped would be too arrogant. Moreover, it would also undermine the food security of each region.
It is not difficult to see whales as a symbol of environmental protection. But it is different from denying sustainable use of whales based on particular values that make them special.
There are many cultures, including Japan’s, where there is no contradiction between utilizing an animal as food and being grateful to the creature for giving up their lives. From the perspective of such cultures, the idea of viewing livestock such as cows and pigs as mere lumps of meat is very uncomfortable.
Achieving Sustainable Use
It is smug to treat animals that can be eaten as if they are industrial raw materials while treating animals that are special in one’s own sense of values as symbols of environmental protection. Imposing this complacency as a global standard creates conflict. Furthermore, this will negatively impact global food security and even increase the negative environmental impact of food.
This is the true symbolism of whales and whaling. From the quantitative perspective of food security, whale meat may be insignificant. However, even that small amount of whale meat could be of great importance to certain regions and peoples. The fact that the affected regions and peoples are limited does not mean that they can be ignored.
There is a theory called the whaling breakwater theory. In it, the whaling issue is a small problem in the overall picture of the sustainable use of marine living resources and conservation of the environment. It symbolizes the same importance as a small crack in a breakwater that, if left unattended, can lead to the collapse of the entire sea wall.
To maintain and promote the principle of sustainable use, it is desirable to promote a better understanding of the whaling issue. That includes taking a broader perspective in its discussions.
This article is published in cooperation with the Institute of Cetacean Research in Japan. Let us hear your thoughts in our comments section.
RELATED:
- Japan’s Non-lethal Whale Survey Continues in the Faraway Antarctic
- IWC68: ‘Sustainable Use’ is the Next Challenge
- INTERVIEW | Managed Well, Whales Will Sustain Us Over the Long Haul — Hirohiko Shimizu
(Read the article in Japanese.)
Author: Joji Morishita, PhD
Former Professor, Tokyo University of Marine Science and Technology