Big Fish

India might have an image as a nation of vegetarians but it also has a somewhat surprising non-vegetarian feature. Among all the countries in the world, it is the third larg­est when it comes to total fish consumed in a year, ac­cording to the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. Only China and Indonesia rank ahead of it. Last year in a written reply to Rajya Sabha, the Union fisheries minister stated that India was also the third larg­est when it came to fish production. And for both consumption and production, Indians still seem to be not getting nearly enough.

In early March, India signed a trade partnership with the Euro­pean Free Trade Association countries—Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland, and one impact this will have is on fish, specifically salmon. Over five years, tariffs on salmon would de­crease from 33 per cent to zero. The Norwegians, who will benefit the most from it, are understandably pleased. This is because of an interesting economic phenomenon. As countries become more prosperous, fish-eating begins to upscale. Most Indians who eat fish in their homes buy species like rohu or sardines which fit the pocket. As they become richer, they gravitate towards more expensive fish like pomfrets or jumbo prawns. In recent years, the salmon has also become part of what online e-commerce sellers offer in their fish baskets. It is very expensive but Indians are consuming more of it. For Norway’s producers, this trend could become a big bonanza in the future because Indians are increasingly eating more and more fish.

Just how much was not very clear until now. A study that has just been published, under the aegis of Worldfish, Indian Council of Agriculture Research, and other related institutions, looked at the data of three National Family Health Surveys, from 2005 to 2021 where respondents had already been asked about their eat­ing patterns. The study took that data and did an analysis specific to fish. What they found was a map of burgeoning love among Indians. As many as 72.1 per cent of Indians were fish eaters. In number terms, that came to just under one billion at 966.9 million. But that was only half the story. The increase in the number of Indians eating fish from 2005 was 236.3 million. As per the report, “In 2019–2020, 5.95% of people ate fish daily, 34.8% did so at least once in a week and 31.35% only occasionally. Throughout India, there was a clear trend in people eating fish more frequently.”

As countries become more prosperous, fish-eating begins to upscale. Most Indians who eat fish in their homes buy species like Rohu or Sardines which fit the pocket. As they become richer, they gravitate towards more expensive fish like Pomfrets or Jumbo Prawns

Share this on

The lead author of the study Arun Padiyar of Worldfish, an international non-profit that focuses on alleviating hunger and poverty, attributes a number of reasons for this increase in fish consumption in India. He said, “One, the availability of fish has increased. Availability at the production side. Secondly, acces­sibility. Fish markets have come nearer to the people and there are home deliveries also happening in urban areas. There are also offerings like fish being cleaned and delivered in ready-to-cook formats. Also, fish are being transported deeper into very inland hinterland areas because there are better cold chain facilities and Styrofoam boxes where they can be kept fresh. Fifteen years back, these kinds of facilities weren’t prevalent. There has also been bet­ter road connectivity, so very fast movement of fish from produc­tion to the consumer markets in various districts and blocks of the country has become possible. There is also a general shift in the dietary patterns of people. Above all, is the increasing population leading to more fish being eaten.”

Fish was eaten more by urban Indians but what was inter­esting in the findings was that the rate of growth was higher in rural areas. As the report noted, “Over the three surveys, the percentage of people who ate all kinds of non-vegetarian food at least once a week significantly increased in both urban and rural areas, though the rate of increase was higher in rural areas. The proportion of people eating fish at least once a week also increased in both areas…The difference in the proportion of people eating nonvegetarian food between rural and urban areas narrowed over the three surveys. In the case of fish consumers, it almost halved.”

The study also looked at which regions in India led in fish consumption. Predictably, coastal states like West Bengal, Kerala, and Goa ranked ahead but there were also the northeast­ern states. Tripura, in fact, was where the largest proportion of people—99.35 per cent—consumed fish. But all its northeastern neighbours and West Bengal were closely behind. Other states with more than 90 per cent fish eaters included Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, and Odisha.

Geography usually determines diet. Padiyar explained, “Coastal areas are traditionally and culturally integrated with fish consump­tion. Like in Goa, Kerala, eastern states like Orissa and West Bengal. We see the same trend in the people in the riverine belt, like the Ganges and Brahmaputra. A lot of fish is available. So, traditionally, it has been the staple for the people there.” At the bottom was Hary­ana where only 20.55 per cent ate fish. Punjab, Rajasthan, Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh were all under 40 per cent and at the bottom tier. But even in these states, the numbers were going up. Haryana, for instance, had 18.1 per cent fish eaters 15 years ago.

A curious revelation was that men ate more fish than women. In states where more than 90 per cent ate fish, the gap was lower but as consumption dropped, the gender gap widened. At an all-India level, around 13 per cent more men ate fish than women. There is no conclusive explanation for why this should be so, but Padiyar thinks of a couple of reasons. He said, “I go around places and states across India for my work and have observed one thing—women mostly consume fish in their own households. But men go out and eat fish too, in restaurants, etc. In urban areas, women are also now eating out and getting more access to fish but, especially in rural areas, they only eat at home.” He also feels that women tend to be more religiously observant than men and that might have a bearing on the lower numbers eating meat and fish. This phenomenon seems to be India-specific. Studies done in other countries about gender differences in fish consumption haven’t shown such a clear demarcation. In 2020, a paper pub­lished in the British Medical Journal that reviewed several studies on determinants of seafood consumption and gender had this to say, “Thirty-one papers explored the association between seafood consumption and sex. Overall, there was not a strong directional association between sex and seafood consumption observed. Sea­food consumption was higher in men than in women in thirteen papers as opposed to eleven papers finding that women were more likely to consume seafood. Two of these studies found that men are more likely to consume fried fish and according to three studies, women were more likely to consume non-fried fish. For a number of papers, no association between fish consumption and sex was identified.”

A curious revelation was that men ate more fish than women. In states where more than 90 per cent ate fish, the gap was lower but as consumption dropped, the gender gap widened. At an all-India level, around 13 per cent more men ate fish than women

Share this on

An unusual change is also becoming more apparent—fish consumption and exports are both rising, but imports are doing so at a faster clip. In the last 15 years, Padiyar says volume-wise consumption increased by 2.2 times and exports by about three times, but imports increased by around five times. He thinks this is because of the demand for fish like basa whose fillets are pre­ferred by restaurant chefs because they are easy to cook and clean. The rise in the availability of salmon also falls into that bracket. Imports however lead to domestic fish not getting their due. “We have our own good fishes and have not promoted value additions in them. Government, industry associations, fishermen, and cor­porations must come forward and support it,” he says.

A study by the National Council of Applied Economic Re­search last year found that 77 per cent of Indian consumption was freshwater fish and the most popular were rohu and catla. Among marine fishes, sardines and bhetki led. Terming fisher­ies a sunrise sector, their report had noted, “…it has immense potential in India to contribute to the economy in terms of value addition by bridging the gap between supply and demand for fish among states and among expenditure strata. There is an enormous scope of transformation through infusing modern technology in terms of preservation, transportation of fish and unifying market access which would bring in a multiplier effect in its contribution towards gross value added in agriculture and the national economy.”

Indian fish consumption meanwhile will only curve upwards. Padiyar’s study looked at three scenarios of what would happen. In the worst case, the total fish consumption would double in 25 years and, if the trend of the last 15 years were to continue, then they expected it to rise by four times. But that would also mean a whole lot of stress on the ecosystem in which fish production happens, and the time to be prepared for it is now. “There will be enormous environmental pressure, so we need to focus on sustainably producing our fish right away. We can’t add too much to marine fishing because it’s already at a very high sustainable yield. We need to have more aquaculture, maybe marine cage cultures like what they do in Norway, Southeast Asia, etc. It has to happen like that, otherwise, if the production doesn’t come, then consumption won’t increase.”

About The Author

Madhavankutty Pillai

Madhavankutty Pillai has no specialisations whatsoever. He is among the last of the generalists. And also Open chief of bureau, Mumbai  

•