Can cell-based wild seafood save oceans around the world?
Teresa Romanovsky • August 3, 2021
Fishing has earned itself an extensive rap sheet of offences, including overfishing, slavery, child labour, illegal fishing and price-fixing. Commercial fishing is a term that encompasses an array of techniques used to capture marine animals to sell.
Overfishing has led to such a depletion of world fish stocks that it is threatening the industry's long-term viability. To add to the already alarming statistics and the efforts to curtail overfishing, climate change may intensify the complications of declining fish stocks. World leaders in conventional seafood fishing are anxiously looking at plant-based and cell-based fish products as a replacement.
Governmental organisations and marine specialists are deeply concerned about the depletion of fish stocks. Understandably, they have concerns about commercial fishing and the massive impact on the ecology of the oceans. Alarmingly, The United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) estimates that almost 80 per cent of the world's fish species are depleted or fully exploited. Their research shows that flounder, cod, haddock, swordfish and bluefin tuna have been particularly hard hit. Commercial fishing is responsible for the untimely deaths of other marine animals such as turtles, dolphins and sharks.
International associations and communities are taking steps to reduce grave overfishing and are concerned about the future of commercial fishing. Are there alternative proteins available that can meet the needs of consumers from around the world? There are genuine concerns that global climate change and the increasing levels of carbon dioxide could inhibit the formation and growth of coral reefs, negatively impacting fish stocks.
Constant talk revolves around cultured beef burgers and laboratory-grown chicken breasts. Can scientists produce cell-based seafood in their labs? To produce cell-based seafood, scientists will need to extract muscle cells from various types of fish, crustaceans or molluscs and then propagate them in a bioreactor. Typically, the cells are grown on an edible scaffold that gives them structure and the same texture as wild-caught fish.
Thai Union is the principal parent company that operates under various brand names such as John West in the UK, Mareblu in Italy, Chicken of the Sea in the USA and Petit Navire in France. At the end of June 2021, the company announced that they signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with V Foods (Thailand) Co., Ltd. V Foods is the producer of More Meat plant-based protein and V Farm plant-based food. The companies will operate out of the same manufacturing facilities, produce existing goods, and develop new products for future consumption.
V Foods is a highly innovative company that puts its heart into research and development and works with the farming community to offer quality food for health and environmentally conscious consumers. The collaboration between Thai Union and V Foods will drive growth in alternative proteins and ready-to-eat, plant-based food.
There are already several companies that are taste-testing cell-based salmon, Pacific yellowtail and shrimp. One of the main concerns is consumer rejection. A staggering 80 per cent of new food products that hit supermarket shelves are rejected by fickle consumers. Marketers have to convince people to make the switch from traditional fish products to cell-based seafood. Initially, the production costs will be way above wild or farmed fish.
As of January 2025, Australia has taken a significant step towards greater corporate accountability and transparency by introducing mandatory climate-related financial disclosures. This and requirements like it are helping to push business into action with 54% of those surveyed by Future Focus feeling the pressure from regulatory requirements. This policy, designed to align with global standards, requires for now very large entities to report on their climate-related risks, opportunities, and actions. While this move is essential for a more sustainable economy, it is also poised to have a profound impact on the job market, particularly in the areas of sustainability, ESG and compliance.
As new sustainability roles emerge in the fight against climate change, Australia faces the challenge of developing and attracting the talent needed to fill them.
In recent developments within the corporate sector, a substantial shift toward differentiating pay based on employees' work location has emerged. This change has sparked considerable debate over its potential effects on workplace equity and inclusion. Detailed insights from industry surveys and research studies, such as those conducted by Herbert Smith Freehills and KPMG, illustrate a growing trend where one-third of employers express intentions to pay remote workers differently than their in-office counterparts. This approach, particularly noted in Australia, involves 38% of senior executives who believe remote working should be a privilege contingent upon trust and seniority. About 37% of these executives are considering implementing pay differentials between remote and in-office staff within the next three to five years.