Europeans lack awareness of fish farming practices

A survey reveals that most Europeans support better welfare for aquatic animals, but lack awareness about fish sentience and farming practices.

The welfare of land-based farmed animals is a well-known concern, but what about the billions of aquatic animals in our food system?

A recent survey explored what the European public thinks about aquatic animals and seafood consumption. This report aims to understand the awareness and perception of aquatic animal welfare amongst consumers in the European Union (E.U.).

Three main research goals were defined:

To acquire updated data in order to strengthen advocacy efforts for aquatic animals, in addition to addressing emerging issues;
To gain strategic insight into what could help shift citizens to become more aware of and concerned for the welfare of aquatic animals; and
To influence upcoming E.U. legislative decisions and aquaculture certification scheme developments.

An online survey was distributed in the spring of 2024, focusing on topics such as attitudes towards animals, the importance and awareness of aquatic animal welfare, consumption habits and behavior, and welfare labelling. There were 12,301 respondents from 12 countries, including the U.S., China, the U.K., the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Poland, Spain, Sweden, and the Netherlands. Data were weighted in each country to be nationally representative for age, gender, and region. This report provides the results from the nine E.U. countries.

Beliefs about fish sentience

Most respondents (71%) agreed that fishes can feel pain. However, there was more doubt when it came to statements about their intelligence and emotions, with only 51% agreeing that fishes are intelligent and 45% agreeing that fishes can feel positive emotions such as pleasure. Women between the ages of 18 and 34 were generally more positive about fish capacities than other gender and age groups.

Support for aquatic animal protection

The majority of respondents (91%) agreed that we should protect the welfare of fishes as we do for other animals we consume. They supported a number of legislative initiatives for aquatic animals such as guaranteeing high welfare for live crustaceans during transport (79%) and requiring farmers to stun aquatic animals before slaughter (70%). Support for these types of policies was stronger in countries like France and Italy and weaker in the Czech Republic, Sweden, and the Netherlands.

Many respondents believed that the sale of live aquatic animals to consumers should be banned. However, concern varied slightly between species, with mussels having less support (48%) than fishes (61%), lobsters (61%), and crabs (60%). Germany, Italy, Poland, France, and Greece showed the strongest support for banning the sale of live fishes and lobsters. Support for these bans was lowest in Spain, the Netherlands, the Czech Republic, and Sweden.

Awareness of fish farming practices

The report notes that most consumers expect public funds for aquaculture to be allocated transparently, with an emphasis on farms that uphold high animal welfare and sustainability standards. However, there was a significant lack of awareness regarding the practices of fish farming. For example, only 37% of respondents were aware that wild-caught fishes are a common ingredient in feeds given to farmed fishes and only 34% were aware that far more farmed fishes die during rearing than farmed land animals. Average awareness was higher in France, Poland, and Germany and lower in Spain, the Czech Republic, and the Netherlands.

Fish consumption habits

Close to half (47%) of respondents identified as meat eaters and 39% consumed fish at least once per week. Weekly fish consumption was higher in Spain, Italy, and France and lower in the Czech Republic, Germany, Poland, and the Netherlands. Fish freshness, quality, and cost were deemed the most important factors. However, 61% of respondents agreed that welfare concerns had an impact on their decision. Nine out of 10 respondents were willing to pay more for higher welfare fish products, with nearly one out of four willing to pay a significant (but unspecified) premium. Respondents associated higher welfare with a number of benefits, not just for fishes but for overall product quality.

Knowledge of fish product labels

Respondents seemed to associate animal welfare considerations with sustainability labels. For instance, 56% believed that “sustainable” means that fishes are kept in conditions that allow them to exhibit all their natural behaviors. More than two-thirds (69%) were open to having information about farming practices, such as the way the fishes were killed, added to fish product labels. However, current consumer knowledge about labelling is poor. Respondents either had a lack of awareness or believed that current certification schemes impose rigorous animal welfare standards, which isn’t the case.

In sum, while it’s good news that the majority of consumers are in favour of welfare standards in aquaculture, the lack of awareness surrounding farming practices, fish sentience, and labelling may be hindering change. With this report, animal advocates can identify knowledge gaps and work on educating the public on the benefits of improved welfare practices and stricter labelling laws. An informed consumer can make more ethical and conscious choices, driving the shift towards a more humane aquatic animal food system.

Original source: https://faunalytics.org