Table 1.
Statistics for anchoveta landings and processing (2001–2011).
Table 2.
Fish to fishmeal and fish oil conversion ratios: national averages from 2001–2006.
Figure 1.
Simplified one-way coupled ecosystem/supply chain model.
The zoom view illustrates how industrial processes and sub-processes are detailed within the supply chain. Environmental and socio-economic impacts of a given link of the supply chain are carried to the next link.
Figure 2.
Proposed sustainability assessment framework for seafood supply chains.
Table 3.
The sustainability indicators proposed, per dimension of sustainability addressed.
Figure 3.
Types of scenarios suitable for seafood sustainability research.
Based on [111]. Examples in red represent the preferences of this research. DHC: direct human consumption; IHC: indirect human consumption (i.e. reduction).
Figure 4.
Alternative exploitation scenarios.
Table 4.
Modelled sub-systems of the Peruvian anchoveta supply chain.
Figure 5.
Ranking of DHC products studied from anchoveta supply chains according to the proposed indicator set.
Per t of fish in product. Shorter negative bars and longer positive bars represent better performance: the range of values on the x-axis represents the maximum positive and negative scores possible for each product. In bottom graphs, all units have the same length, even though the x-axis of the right-side graph was shortened for convenience. Only five indicators are shown in order to limit redundancy between indicators, simplify the diagram, and increase balance among indicators from the three pillars of sustainability (impacts are cumulative and no weighting factor was used). Species names: anchoveta (Engraulis ringens), black pacu (Colossoma macropomum), hake (Merluccius gayi), trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), tilapia (Oreochromis spp.).
Table 5.
Comparison of environmental performance of fisheries and aquaculture direct-human-consumption products, at plant gate and after distribution, per t of fish in product.
Figure 6.
Alternative fates of 1 t of landed anchoveta.
Excluding other agricultural inputs to aquafeeds and DHC products, expressed as tonnes of landed anchoveta processed into 1 t of final product; HGT: headed, gutted, tailed; FM: fish oil. Species names: anchoveta (Engraulis ringens), black pacu (Colossoma macropomum), trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), tilapia (Oreochromis spp.).
Figure 7.
Mass outputs associated with alternative exploitation scenarios.
Per key product on a log10 scale. Percentages represent variation from the current situation. Species names: anchoveta (Engraulis ringens), black pacu (Colossoma macropomum), hake (Merluccius gayi), trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), tilapia (Oreochromis spp.).
Figure 8.
Comparison of alternative exploitation scenarios.
In terms of product masses, environmental score, biotic resource use, human nutritional protein availability, gross profit and employment per key product on a log10 scale. Percentages represent variation from the current situation.
Figure 9.
Indicators of ecosystem impacts.
Impacts on Biotic Natural Resources (IBNR) at the species level, mean trophic level (TL) of landings, proportion of predatory fish in commercial biomass, and inverse fishing pressure under the alternative exploitation scenarios. The Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) of anchoveta was estimated at over 5 million t [135]; thus, a 5-year mean of total landings (5.5 million t) was used as a proxy. The MSY of hake was estimated at ∼27,000 t until its stock fully recovers [89]. Species names: anchoveta (Engraulis ringens), hake (Merluccius gayi).