Autonomous projects in the face of the global fishing market: women fish processors in Senegal in a context of climate emergency

ABSTRACT

This article aims to analyse the difficult relationship between the needs of the Senegalese state to obtain economic compensation for the over-exploitation of natural resources, the right to food sovereignty of the local population, and the survival of the environment. It focuses on the fisheries agreements signed by Senegal with the European Union (EU) and how these have an impact on the conditions of people who make a living from the sector, analysing the situation and the self-organising of women involved in fish processing, an activity that sustains their autonomy and their ongoing reproduction as a collective. Declared goals of sustainable fishing in the latest protocol implementing the EU–Senegal Fisheries Agreement (2019–2024) are at odds with the actual over-exploitation of the marine environment. The commitment expressed in Article 2 of the agreement to ‘promote sustainable fishing and protect marine biodiversity’ contrasts with the lived experiences of women fish processors, expressed in denunciations of campaigns such as Greenpeace Afrique’s AnaSamaJën (where is my fish?). Based on the assumption that overfishing is a form of extractivism that undermines food sovereignty and the sustainability of local societies, this article first analyses the agreements signed between Senegal and the EU, including their clear anthropocentric ontology (Escobar 2017) and discusses how the state takes up the financial, environmental and food challenges posed by climate change. The second part, based on fieldwork and interviews with women fish processors and other actors in the sector, shows how these international agreements affect their economic and social conditions as well as their resistance, where social struggles and environmental thinking are linked.

RÉSUMÉ

Cet article vise à analyser la relation difficile entre le besoin de l’État sénégalais d’obtenir une compensation économique pour la surexploitation des ressources naturelles, le droit à la souveraineté alimentaire de la population locale et la survie de l’environnement. L’auteur s’intéresse aux accords de pêche signés par le Sénégal avec l’Union européenne (UE) et à leur impact sur les personnes qui vivent de ce secteur, en analysant leur situation et la mobilisation des femmes impliquées dans la transformation du poisson, une activité qui assure leur autonomie et leur reproduction continue en tant que collectif. Les objectifs déclarés de « pêche durable » dans le dernier protocole de mise en œuvre de l’accord de pêche UE-Sénégal (2019-2024) sont en contradiction avec la surexploitation réelle de l’environnement marin. L’engagement exprimé dans l’article 2 de l’accord, tendant à « promouvoir la pêche durable et de protéger la biodiversité marine », contraste avec les expériences vécues par les femmes transformatrices de poisson, exprimées dans des campagnes telles que AnaSamaJën (où est mon poisson ?) de Greenpeace Afrique. Partant de l’hypothèse que la surpêche est une forme d’extractivisme qui mine la souveraineté alimentaire et la durabilité des sociétés locales, cet article analyse d’abord les accords signés entre le Sénégal et l’UE, y compris son ontologie clairement anthropocentrique (Escobar 2017), et discute de la manière dont l’État prend en charge les défis financiers, environnementaux et alimentaires posés par le changement climatique. La deuxième partie de l’article, basée sur un travail de terrain et des entretiens avec des femmes transformatrices de poisson et d’autres acteurs du secteur, montre comment ces accords internationaux affectent leurs conditions économiques et sociales ainsi que leur résistance, où les luttes sociales et la réflexion environnementale sont liées.

RESUMO

Este artigo tem como objetivo analisar a difícil relação entre a necessidade do Estado senegalês de obter compensação económica pela sobreexploração dos recursos naturais, o direito à soberania alimentar da população local e a sobrevivência do ambiente. O autor centra-se nos acordos de pesca assinados pelo Senegal com a União Europeia (UE) e o impacto dos mesmos nas pessoas que vivem do sector, analisando a sua situação e a organização das mulheres envolvidas no processamento do pescado, uma actividade que sustenta sua autonomia e sua reprodução contínua como um coletivo. Os objetivos declarados de «pesca sustentável» no último protocolo de aplicação do acordo de pescas entre a UE e o Senegal (2019-2024) estão em contradição com a atual sobreexploração do ambiente marinho. O compromisso expresso no artigo 2.° do acordo de «promover a pesca sustentável e proteger a biodiversidade marinha» contrasta com as experiências vividas por mulheres transformadoras de peixe, expressas em campanhas como a AnaSamaJën (“onde está o meu peixe?”) da Greenpeace Afrique. Com base no pressuposto de que a sobrepesca é uma forma de extrativismo que mina a soberania alimentar e a sustentabilidade das sociedades locais, este artigo analisa primeiro os acordos assinados entre o Senegal e a UE, incluindo a sua clara ontologia antropocéntrica (Escobar 2017), e uma discussão sobre como o Estado enfrenta os desafios financeiros, ambientais e alimentares colocados pelas alterações climáticas. A segunda parte, assente em trabalho de campo e entrevistas com mulheres transformadoras de pescado e outros actores do sector, mostra como estes acordos internacionais afectam as suas condições económicas e sociais, bem como a sua resistência, onde as lutas sociais e o pensamento ambiental estão ligados.

KEYWORDS:

• Climate crisis
• Senegal
• fisheries
• food sovereignty
• women fish processors

MOTS-CLÉS:

• Crise climatique
• Sénégal
• pêcheries
• souveraineté alimentaire
• femmes transformatrices de poisson

PALAVRAS-CHAVE:

• Crise climática
• Senegal
• pesca
• soberania alimentar
• mulheres processadoras de peixe

Acknowledgements

I am extremely grateful for the willingness of all the people to be interviewed, and especially to Abdou Karim Sall for his warm welcome and support. I am also grateful to the University of Seville’s Development Cooperation Office for funding the fieldwork.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1 In a study carried out in 2003, 7000 women fish processors were counted, although it was acknowledged that the real figure was much higher because not all processing sites and not all women in the sector were taken into account, as only the women who owned the means to process fish were counted (Dème et al. in Mbaye 2005). Most processing centres are located by the sea and close to the main landing centres. The main fish processing regions include Thiès, Ziguinchor, Dakar, Saint Louis, Fatick and Louga (Fall et al. 2014).

2 The fieldwork was carried out during two stays in Joal-Fadiouth, in 2012 and 2015, which allowed me to learn about the context and the changes taking place in the sector. During these stays, different people in different positions were interviewed, among them: Tenin Ndiaye (president of GIE Interprofessionnel des produits de la mer de Joal-Fadiouth), Albertine Gaye (treasurer of Diam Bougoume association of women processors), Gnilane Sané (retired woman fish processor), Aissatou (woman fish processor of Guinean origin), Khady Ndiaye (president of the Joal local fishing union), Abdou Karim Sall (president of the Joal-Fadiouth young fishers’ association and current president of the AGIRE association), Haïdar El Ali (Senegalese Minister of Fisheries 2013–14), and Moustapha Thiam (director of Maritime Fisheries, Ministry of Fisheries). Monitoring of the situation has continued to this day through regular contact with the local population of Joal-Fadiouth, continuous review of the literature and by accessing documents. All this has allowed me to carry out the diachronic study presented here.

3 The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), signed in 1982 and in force since 1994, establishes an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of 200 nautical miles in which access to fishery resources is regulated by the jurisdiction of the respective coastal countries, thus placing 95% of the world’s fish stocks and 35% of the oceans under the control of coastal countries (Losa et al. 2010). It so happens that most of these countries, including Senegal, do not have the financial or technical means to exploit all their resources, so they opt to sign fishing agreements with foreign states that can exploit the surplus stocks not fished by nationals (Sane 2000).

4 Although industrial fishing and artisanal fishing have formal, delimited exploitation zones – and this is one of the fundamental differences between the two types of fishing that the Senegalese Ministry of Fisheries has established – this delimitation is not respected by either sector. According to the regulations, small-scale fishing should be carried out within six miles of the coast, but in practice these limits are often exceeded because no species are found in the area set aside for small-scale fishing. Similarly, industrial fishing vessels often fail to comply with the regulations and are sighted operating in the artisanal zone, which they are not allowed to enter. It is clear that industrial fishing requires more capital, consumes more energy per tonne of catch, provides much less work and is mainly responsible for overfishing the most profitable species.

5 In the 1980s, artisanal fishers were already working for Spanish freezer trawlers and in the 1990s for Korean vessels (Sall and Morand 2008).

6 Artisanal fishers also contribute to environmental degradation, as they are forced to continue fishing to cover the basic needs of a population that has seen the fish in their waters diminish as a result of international fishing agreements. As they have to cover greater distances in search of fish, the need for fuel is greater, accounting for 70% of expenses (Bâ et al. 2016) in a context of rising prices due to the depletion of fossil resources.

7 The translations here and elsewhere in the article were made by the author.

8 A copy of the declaration is held by the author.

9 These are agreements negotiated by the EU with third states, under a mandate from the European Council and a binding report by the European Parliament, in which the agreements are said to exploit, in a sustainable manner, part of the surplus of the fishing resources in exchange for financial compensation. The agreement with Senegal includes 28 freezer tuna seiners and eight pole-and-line vessels for highly migratory species, as well as two trawlers for deep-sea demersal fish. In addition, it includes Article 6 ‘on the review of fishing opportunities’ and Article 7 ‘on new fishing opportunities and experimental fishing’ (EU 2014).

10 The agreement covers 28 freezer tuna seiners, 10 pole-and-line vessels and five longliners for highly migratory species, and two trawlers for deep-sea demersal fish. It includes Article 8 on ‘review of fishing opportunities and conditions of exercise of fishing activities’; Article 9 on ‘by-catch’, with a commitment to cooperating in order to reduce the catch of non-target species, such as seabirds, sea turtles, sharks and marine mammals; and Article 10 on ‘new fishing opportunities and experimental fishing’ (EU 2019).

11 According to a Greenpeace report (2019), Senegal had eight fishmeal and fish oil factories in 2019, to which three in Gambia and 39 in Mauritania can be added, as these countries share coasts and therefore waters.

12 In 2018 Senegal exported 36% of its total fishmeal to Vietnam, and 26% to Turkey. For fish oil, in 2019 Denmark imported 528 tonnes, which corresponded to 60% of Senegal’s total fish oil exports. This was followed by Spain with 216 tonnes, representing 25% of total fish oil exports (Thiao and Bunting 2022, 48).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Susana Moreno-Maestro

Susana Moreno-Maestro is a professor in the Department of Social Anthropology at the University of Seville and is a member of the GEISA research group. She has devoted much of her research to Senegalese migration and the organisation of the Senegalese diaspora. Her work focuses on African migration and the management of cultural diversity in Andalusia, Afro-descendancy and cultural resistance to globalisation in Africa.