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

Autonomous projects in the face of the global fishing market: women fish processors in Senegal in a context of climate emergency SUSANA MORENO-MAESTRO Departamento de Antropología Social Universidad de Sevilla Esta es la versión aceptada del manuscrito publicado por Taylor & Francis en Review of African Political Economy, el 19 de diciembre de 2023. Disponible online en: https://doi.org/10.1080/03056244.2023.2293607 Autonomous projects in the face of the global fishing market: women fish processors in Senegal in a context of climate emergency Author: Susana Moreno-Maestro http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9540-1629 Affiliation: Department of Social Anthropology, Universidad de Sevilla, Seville, Spain CONTACT Susana Moreno-Maestro susa[email protected] 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. The author focuses here 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) is 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. KEYWORDS Climate crisis; Senegal; fisheries; food sovereignty; women fish processors Projets autonomes face au marché mondial de la pêche : les femmes transformatrices de poisson au Sénégal dans un contexte d’urgence climatique 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. MOTS-CLÉS Crise climatique ; Sénégal ; pêcheries ; souveraineté alimentaire ; femmes transformatrices de poisson Projetos autónomos face ao mercado pesqueiro global: o caso das mulheres transformadoras de pescado no Senegal num contexto de emergência climática 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.º 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. PALAVRAS-CHAVE Crise climática; Senegal; pesca; soberania alimentar; mulheres processadoras de peixe Introduction The current climate crisis is increasingly evident in West African coastal ecosystems, with displacement of species due to warming ocean waters, soil erosion due to the direction and size of currents, more frequent ocean winds and rising sea levels (Sané et al. 2021). In Senegal these conditions are compounded by the consequences of public policies determined by international trade agreements that exacerbate the over-exploitation of the marine environment (Moreno- Maestro and Aris 2013), leading to the expansion of fish oil and fishmeal factories aimed at export markets. These factors create multiple challenges, from a shortage of fish available in the local market to the dangers posed to the subsistence of a population that depends on fish both for its physical survival and for the income that women derive from fish processing. 1 These conditions are captured in the comment of a fish processor, Tenin Ndiaye: ‘[i]n artisanal processing, we only have the canoes. If the canoes don’t have fish, if they go fishing and have nothing, we have nothing to process.’ 2 Research in 2011 stated that more than 70% of the women had more than 10 years’ experience and were, on average, heads of families of six to eight people (DPM in Fall et al. 2014). Income varied according to the scale of production, the equipment used and the clientele, and was used to cover daily expenses for food, school, repairs to production equipment, and soforth (ibid., 2535). The quantities of processed products varied according to the time of year. Historically, the period of low production corresponded to the rainy season (July to September) and the highest production levels were obtained during the rest of the year. The context of fish scarcity is no more than two generations old. Gnilane Sané, one of the first women fish processors in Joal-Fadiouth, which is in the department of Mbour in Thiès region, commented that when she began processing she earned a lot of money, and that it was only after she retired that she heard that ‘things have changed a lot’, with a fast decline in processors’ livelihoods. Tension between the public authorities and the Senegalese fishing sector is a constant because, while the state has prioritised the needs of export markets, the local population has fought for food sovereignty and the survival of the environment by defending its own activities, whether by fishing or fish processing. The Senegalese state and the fishing sector Since independence in 1960, the Senegalese government has approached the economy within development framework, where an ideology of ‘growth’ has marked every decision. Embracing such a developmentalist framework – an approach epitomising anthropocentric ontology, as characterised in Escobar’s writings – the state assumed that industrial fishing constituted progress, interpreting reality in terms of imbalance between a supposed abundance of ‘natural resources’ in the marine environment and the low catch capacity of Senegalese boats. This ‘progress’ in practice meant fully exploiting so-called natural resources. To this end, the state provided subsidies to industrial fishing (Ba 2002, 190–191) and signed trade agreements with foreign countries permitting catches in their waters. Not only the fishing sector but also other sectors of the Senegalese economy depended on the resulting compensation (Guillotreau, Proutière-Maulion, and Vallé 2011). 3 The structural adjustment programmes of the 1980s, with the implementation of trade liberalisation and privatisation policies (Dembelé 2007; Diop and Magrin 2012), were decisive in establishing this orientation in fishing policies, with fishery product exports taking precedence over other products such as groundnut and phosphate exports (Chauveau and Samba 2012). It was in this historical context that a large section of the artisanal fishing industry was reoriented towards foreign markets, mainly in Europe and Asia, as a means of accumulating foreign currency. This reorientation was bolstered by the devaluation of the West African CFA franc, crucial for Senegal’s objective of strengthening the competitiveness of its products (ENDA 2007, in Thiao 2012). The shortages on the local market caused by industrial fishing 4 have been exacerbated by the growth of artisanal fishing, as these fishers sell their catches to foreign intermediaries at a higher price than the local market can afford (FAO 2008). 5 At the same time as the smallscale, artisanal fishing industry grew, local consumption of fresh products decreased from 82.7% of total fish in 1981 to 60% by the end of the 2000s (Thiao 2012, 307). Because of this, it would be illusory to oppose an industrial fishery aimed at exports to an artisanal fishery that would supposedly be entirely focused on satisfying the domestic market, where the socio-economic effects would be positive and the weak means would guarantee a limited impact on resources. (Diop and Magrin 2012, 321). 6 Compounding the growth of fishmeal and fish oil factories described above, this reorientation of artisanal fishing towards exports has had obvious consequences for the women processors, with a declining share of the fish destined for traditional processing. Traditional processing is the preservation of fish through drying and smoking techniques (Mbaye, in Fall et al. 2014), with 90% of the work carried out by women. Noting that the problem is not exclusive to Joal-Fadiouth, local fish processor Albertine Gaye commented that ‘in St Louis, in Dakar, in Cayar – everywhere where there are processing sites and fishing piers – we have problems. Work is no longer going on. Work is not going on.’ These developments have had a drastic impact on supply to the domestic market, on which women’s activity in the sector depends. Karim Sall, current president of the Agire assotiation, an organisation that operates at the level of the Joal-Fadiouth Marine Protected Area, commented on this shrinking availability: [the time] when we had the possibility to export was when fishing started to be attacked. Artisanal fishing was not highly commercialised. It was commercialised for the people or for the rest of the country. Even if you fished 10 million tonnes, you didn’t know who to sell it to. I argue that what Escobar terms the ‘dominant ontology of devastation’ (2017, 70) is evident in this testimony, where the increase in catches is driven by productivity growth and not by local need. Production destined for local and subregional consumption has been negatively affected by the overwhelming social and political impact of developmentalist change, which is well captured by Escobar’s framework of ‘dualistic ontology of separation, control and appropriation’ (ibid., 89). Several interviewees commented on these challenges, including the following: The current problem of transformation is the shortage of products. Products are in short supply. Fish is becoming extinct. It is becoming extinct in Senegal. (Ténin Ndiaye) I was one of the first to do the processing in Joal. There were lots and lots of fish. … You didn’t [need to] spend 350 [CFA] francs for a species that is totally extinct today. (Gnilane Sané) Based on these testimonies, it is clear that local processing is in danger when ‘development’ orients economic activity towards exports, in contrast to the more holistic understanding of fish processing held by many participants that emphasises the ontological relationship between ‘everything that exists’, in this case, between marine biodiversity, communities and the environment as a whole. Specifically, women fish processors express an awareness of the interconnected nature of their work, state economic strategy and the dangers posed by climate change. Despite the threat to local economic activities, Senegal has continued to sign agreements with the EU up to the present day, with a single hiatus from 2006 to 2014, when the Senegalese government temporarily refused renewal due to the EU’s proposed terms of compensation, percentage of the catch and permitted percentage of local Senegalese personnel on board (Emonet 2006). From the moment it refused to sign, the Senegalese government notably claimed that it was prioritising of artisanal fisheries and domestic business development, incorporating the concept of ‘sustainable fisheries’ into a number of policy programmes purportedly to address both food security and sustainable development (Rougyatou Ka, Ba, and Mawloud Diakhaté 2022, 15). For example, the Ministry of Fisheries and the Maritime Economy published a ‘Fisheries and aquaculture sectoral policy letter (2008– 2013)’ declaring its objectives of ‘significant reforms aimed at sustainably managing fishery resources, restoring coastal and inland ecosystems and increasing the added value of fishery products’. Recognising that the objectives had not been met, the government reiterated these goals in its subsequent ‘Sectoral policy letter for the development of fisheries and aquaculture (2016–2023)’, stating that [the policy] will be implemented through the following three sectoral programmes: 1) sustainable management of fisheries resources and restoration of habitats programme, aimed at making the management of maritime and continental fishing more sustainable; 2) aquaculture development programme; and 3) enhancement of fisheries production programme. (Ministry of Fisheries and Maritime Economy 2016, 7) 7 Deploying a rhetoric of climate change mitigation, the state called upon artisanal fishers to make efforts to ensure the sustainability of the environment (Guillotreau, Proutière- Maulion, and Vallé 2011). In the meantime, Senegal’s suspension of its agreement with the EU did not mean the suspension of individual country agreements between Senegal and EU states through private agreements and the creation of mixed companies. Local actors denounced the presence of large Spanish, French and Russian boats from which fish was shipped either abroad or to foreign companies’ processing factories in Senegal Faced with this dilemma, in February 2012 a number of local artisanal fisheries councils, fishers’ associations, NGOs and women processors’ associations came together and published a joint declaration on fisheries. The signatories declared: 8 We are determined to mobilise in solidarity against the granting of fishing authorisations to the foreign trawler fleet for as long as sustainable fishing conditions are not established in Senegalese waters. [Among the demands made are] the immediate revocation of fishing authorisations given to foreign industrial fleets, a moratorium on the granting of new authorisations to foreign industrial fishing, the control of illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, the implementation of recommendations aimed at stabilising stocks of species in a situation of over-exploitation, the reinforcement of the networks of Marine Protected Areas, the accompaniment and strengthening of the artisanal sector and the reinforcement of subregional cooperation for the improvement of shared stock management, research and joint surveillance. Amid this context of rising tensions, relations with the EU were resumed in 2014 within the framework of the EU’s Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements 9 . The Minister of Fisheries at the time, a well-known environmentalist, discussed the agreement when he was interviewed in 2015: When the European Union suspended the agreements [2006–14], what happened was that their boats did not return to Europe. The Spanish boats, the French boats, have stayed, they have set up companies under Senegalese law that take our fish and export it to their countries. All the fish! So, when I became minister, I said: there is a singular agreement that has existed since 2006 that has been signed with the tuna fishermen, Spanish and French. What is this exception that lasts nine years! I said to the European Union: do you want to fish my tuna? If you want to fish it, you have to pay the fee. Now they bring millions of [CFA] francs to my country, it allows the continuation of fishing for tuna, because since 2006 they haven’t stopped fishing for tuna! But you are not allowed to fish the small ones, you only fish for tuna. This is the agreement that I signed when I was minister. (Haïdar El Ali, Senegalese Minister of Fisheries 2013–14) However, from the Ministry of Fisheries itself, the Director of Maritime Fisheries when interviewed in 2012 cast doubt on the ability to impose controls on fishing to some species and not others, stating that ‘Senegal is characterised by the multiplicity of species, all species are mixed everywhere, and this is a problem’ (Moustapha Thiam, Ministry of Fisheries). In essence, over-exploitation of tuna has an impact on other species in the marine environment. The most recent agreement signed with the EU covers the period 2019–24. This agreement also includes the commitment to ‘promote sustainable fisheries and protect marine biodiversity’. 10 However, I concur with Naredo (1997) that the concept of ‘sustainable’ in this case, applied to fisheries, is merely a generalised claim that does not automatically translate into the wider systemic or structural change. The concept is assumed to have a transformative character, producing change simply by naming it, instead of implementing much-needed restructuring in practice. In short, this historical overview reveals two crucial issues: (1) that responsible fisheries management and policy change have been pushed aside in negotiations between Senegal and the EU, with Senegal continuing to favour compensation for ‘extraction’ and the EU clamouring for access to Senegalese waters; and 2) that there is a mobilised population denouncing these agreements and attempting to pressure the government to shift the orientation of its fishing policies in the interests of both food security and the protection of the marine environment. Women fish processors in Senegal One of the social consequences of the globalisation of markets has been the large internal movement of people from rural areas to the coast to work in the fishing sector. This is the case historically, as exemplified by the family of Albertine Gaye, a woman processor whose ancestors are from outside Joal-Fadiouth. She described how ‘it is because of fishing that [our family] came here. And we were born here, and our children were born here. Now they are from Joal.’ In recent decades, fishing districts in this area have grown faster than the national average and coastal towns have seen their populations multiply. This development is well illustrated by Joal-Fadiouth, which had 18,000 inhabitants in 1988 and has now tripled in size to a population of 54,000 in 2019, arguably a contributing factor to the over-exploitation of the maritime environment. This increase in population and fishing activity is reflected in the diverse origins of the women now processing the fish. Processor Tenin Ndiaye recounted, ‘[t]oday, in this place, there are only a few of us of Joal origin. All the rest are Senegalese women who come from other towns and cities.’ Women who come to Joal-Fadiouth to work in fish processing come not only from other parts of Senegal, but also from other countries in the subregion such as Aissatou, from Guinea, who is employed as a processor in Khelcom: ‘I came here to work with fish. That’s why we came here, to get by. There is nothing in our country, there is nothing.’ Khelcom, one of the largest fish processing sites in West Africa, is located in Joal- Fadiouth, drawing hundreds of women to the area to work. Two types of products are processed at Khelcom: smoked fish, kecax, and dried fish, gejj. The women carry out the entire production system: gutting, trimming, salting, fermenting and drying. They buy the fish from the wharf, hire carts to transport it to Khelcom, and buy the salt and millet stalks for the smoking. Once processed, the fish is packed for distribution throughout Senegal and West Africa. In addition to the difficult conditions caused by the decline in fish available for local consumption, export sectors have favoured products with a high commercial value (for example, cephalopods, shrimp and groundfish), leaving only small maritime products for the domestic market (such as sardine, anchovy and herring) (Guillotreau, Proutière-Maulion, and Vallé 2011). When the eight fishmeal and fish oil factories currently in Senegal were established, reassurances were given that local supplies would not be affected. But Karim Sall described the activities of the Omega Fishing factory located in Joal-Fadiouth, noting that ‘[t]hey said they were going to use fish waste to make fishmeal, but they don’t use fish waste, they use fresh sardines. They buy the fish from the seashore, from the quay.’ 11 Smaller fish are sought for animal consumption in Europe and Asia, leaving women with no fish for processing. 12 Senegalese export of small pelagics rose from 70,944 tonnes in 2009 to more than 200,000 tonnes in 2019. Conversely, from more than 217,000 tonnes of small fish on the local market in 2009, the total fell drastically to 139,000 tonnes in 2018. In terms of individual consumption, annual consumption per inhabitant fell from 18 kilograms in 2009 to half that level, nine kilograms, in 2018 (Dème and Dème 2021, 11–12), a serious decline from a nutritional standpoint. Factories require as much as five kilograms of fish to produce one kilogram of fishmeal, accelerating the over-exploitation of the marine environment and leaving entire regions with shortages. These conditions are compounded by health problems in areas close to fish factories, where local communities report an increase in respiratory diseases and gastrointestinal problems resulting from industrial sewage (Thiao et Bunting 2022, 50). Women engaged in fish processing have formed organisations to collectivise and empower their economic activities in the face of the challenges posed by wider market forces. They have set up groupements d’intérêt economique (economic interest groups – GIEs), formally organised groups that are empowered to see public funding for their activities. GIEs are usually created from traditional women’s associations but are also linked to broader economic activities and training (Lulli 2003; Coulibaly 2023). As these GIEs are exclusively for women, access to the resources is for women only. Although this collectivisation is mainly carried out by women, some men take part in the activities due to the lack of work. But, comments Tenin Ndiaye, The work is women’s work. The GIE is a women’s GIE. It is not a men’s and women’s GIE. The men are there, they work to earn their bread, but they are not part of the GIE. It’s only the women. The Joal-Fadiouth GIE, in turn, is exclusively for Senegalese women, with the ownership of the ovens remaining, for the most part, in the hands of local women. Thus, although it is women who set up the cooperatives and own the means of production (Fall et al. 2014), there are, in turn, hierarchies and social inequalities based on ethnic and national criteria in the processing sites. In sum, the dynamics of the processing sites have heightened scarcity and instability because of the over-exploitation of industrial fishing and the reorientation of artisanal fishing. The testimony of a local GIE federation treasurer makes this point clear: Before, when we had fish, we worked very well, we took care of the children’s studies, the house and everything at home. But nowadays we have enormous difficulties. You go to work and you have nothing. You pay for the children’s schooling, the children’s health care, the cleaning of the house … Without means, this is not possible. (Albertine Gaye, treasurer of Diam Bougoume) Before the Omega Fishing factory was built, for example, women started to organise against its construction, well aware of its potentially harmful impact on their livelihoods and the environment, both locally and in other regions, as the fish from the port of Joal-Fadiouth historically was also destined for other processing sites. Given the dangers posed by these new factories, fish processor Tenin Ndiaye declared: ‘we are not going to let them do it. We are all together. If there is a disease, we are all affected.’ This insistence of ‘we are not going to let them do it’ was translated into various public awareness-raising activities directed at the authorities, neighbourhood leaders and the community. However, despite this mobilisation, they did not succeed in stopping the installation of the fishmeal and fish oil factory. Mbembé, A. 2016. “Achille Mbembe: ‘Cuando el poder brutaliza el cuerpo, la resistencia asume una forma visceral’.” El Diario, interview by A. Varela, P. L. Tiana and A. Fernández-Savater, translated from French by P. Lapuente. http://www.eldiario.es/interferencias/achille-mbembe-brutaliza- resistencia-visceral_132_3941963.html. Ministry of Fisheries and Maritime Economy (of the Republic of Senegal). 2016. “Lettre de Politique Sectorielle de Développement de la Pêche et de l’Aquaculture (LPSDPA) 2016-2023.” Dakar: Ministry of Fisheries and Maritime Economy. Moreno-Maestro, S., and J. P. Aris. 2013. “La pesca en Senegal: Entre el mercado global y la subsistencia comunitaria.” Revista Andaluza de Antropología 4 (March): 103–121. Naredo, J. M. 1997. “Sobre el origen, el uso y el contenido del término sostenible.” Habitat: Ciudades para un Futuro más Sostenible. http://habitat.aq.upm.es/cs/p2/a004.html. Rougyatou Ka, R., B. Ba, and M. Mawloud Diakhaté. 2022. “La durabilité des systèmes halieutiques sénégalais dans un contexte d’exploitation des hydrocarbures : réflexion géographique à partir des territoires de la Grande-Côte.” Afrique et Développement XLVII (3): 9–42. Sall, A., and P. Morand. 2008. “Pêche artisanale et émigration des jeunes africains par voie piroguière”. Politique africaine 1 (109): 32–41. Sane, K. 2000. “Les accords de pêche entre l’Union Européenne et le Sénégal: enjeux et impacts sur la gestión des ressources halieutiques.” Memoria DEA (equivalent to Diploma of Advanced Studies). Dakar: Université Cheikh Anta Diop. Sané, T., Dièye, E. H. B., B. Solly, B. D. Ba, M. Thior, L. Descroix, M.-C. Cormier-Salem and M. Diakhaté. 2021. “Vulnérabilité et résilience des socio-écosystèmes littoraux d’Afrique de l’Ouest : état des connaissances actuelles et interrogation sur le devenir du littoral sénégalo-bissau-guinéen.” Belgeo 1. https://doi.org/10.4000/belgeo.50403. Sow, P., and K. Tété. 2007. Cajas de ahorro populares africanas en Cataluña: tipos y formas de prácticas financieras sumergidas de los inmigrantes. Informe Final. Barceolona: Grupo de Estudios y de Reflexión sobre África. Thiao, D. 2012. “Enjeux de consommation de produits halieutiques au Sénégal dans un contexte de recomposition de marché.” In La faim par le marché: Aspects sénégalais de la mondialisation, edited by P. Pillon, 304–316. Paris: L’Harmattan. Thiao, D., and S. W. Bunting. 2022. “Impacts socioéconomiques et biologiques de l’industrie des aliments pour animaux à base de poisson en Afrique subsaharienne.” Circulaire de la FAO sur les pêches et l’aquaculture no. 1236. Rome: FAO, WorldFish, University of Greenwich. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb7990fr.