Overseas
There is an uncomfortable truth that the European seafood sector struggles to address openly: Europe consumes more fish than ever, but produces less and less of it.
This is not perception or political rhetoric. It is a structural reality confirmed by a recent study from the European Parliament.
Today, more than 80% of the fish consumed in the European Union originates from non-EU countries. When considering the portion of domestic production actually available for internal consumption — after exports are deducted — the figure drops to a striking 14%.
This is not the result of a sudden crisis. It is the cumulative outcome of long-standing structural dynamics, regulatory choices, and market conditions. And that is precisely what makes the issue more serious.
Europe Produces Fish — But Not the Fish It Eats
One of the most paradoxical aspects of the EU fish production decline lies in species mismatch.
The European Union continues to fish and farm seafood. However, it does not primarily produce the species most demanded by consumers.
Cod, tuna, salmon, shrimp and Alaska pollock account for nearly half of total EU seafood consumption. Yet EU self-sufficiency for these species is close to zero.
At the same time, a significant share of European catches consists of species exported to international markets.
In practical terms, Europe catches fish, exports it, and then imports the fish it consumes.
Such a system can function under stable global conditions. It becomes fragile when geopolitical, economic or environmental disruptions occur.
Imported Fish Is Often Cheaper
Price is the decisive factor.
On retail shelves, imported fish frequently appears more competitive than EU-produced seafood. This is not solely a matter of efficiency.
EU producers operate under:
-
Higher labor costs
-
Elevated fuel and energy prices
-
Aging fleets that are difficult to modernize
-
Among the strictest environmental and social regulations worldwide
Many supplier countries operate with structurally lower costs or highly integrated production systems. In some cases, competitiveness is accompanied by environmental and labor standards that are not comparable to those required of European operators.
Moreover, a significant share of seafood imports benefits from reduced or zero tariffs, further amplifying competitive imbalance.
The Risk of Silent Dependence
As long as global trade flows smoothly, dependence on imports remains almost invisible.
Recent years have demonstrated how fragile that balance can be.
Wars, sanctions, energy crises, inflation and climate-related disruptions have revealed a fundamental reality: countries that do not maintain control over their food production capacity are exposed to systemic risks.
In the fisheries sector, the European Union finds itself in that position.
If imports decline or become significantly more expensive, internal production is not sufficient to compensate for the gap.
Aquaculture: A Promise That Has Not Taken Off
On paper, aquaculture should represent the solution to the EU fish production decline.
In reality, European aquaculture remains largely stagnant.
Production has hovered around one million tonnes for over a decade and covers only about 10% of EU seafood consumption. This is not due to a lack of technical expertise, but to well-known structural barriers:
-
Slow and fragmented authorization procedures
-
Limited access to maritime space and freshwater resources
-
Rising feed and energy costs
-
Limited attractiveness for private investment
Meanwhile, competing countries have built vertically integrated aquaculture value chains capable of scaling rapidly and supplying the EU market with consistency and competitive pricing.
This Is Not Europe Versus the World
The issue is not to demonize imports. International trade is an integral part of the seafood sector and will remain so.
The problem arises when internal production loses strategic weight and can no longer perform a balancing function.
At that point, the system ceases to be resilient.
The European Parliament study is explicit: without a revision of industrial, trade and investment policies, the EU’s dependence on seafood imports will continue to increase.
A Value Chain Issue
The EU fish production decline does not concern only fishermen and fish farmers.
It affects:
-
Processing industries
-
Retail and distribution
-
Consumers
-
Public policy frameworks
-
The overall competitiveness of the European agri-food system
Strengthening domestic production does not mean closing markets. It means rebuilding equilibrium between global trade and European production capacity.
The Real Question
Europe will continue to consume seafood.
The real question is different: who will produce it over the next twenty years?
If the answer is “increasingly further away,” then the issue will no longer be merely economic — it will be strategic.
And the European seafood sector may realize it too late.
For more insights on the future of Italian and European fisheries and the blue economy, follow ongoing coverage and analysis on Pesceinrete.
