At the global level, women’s participation in aquaculture is estimated at 70 percent of the total workforce, all production modes included. Again, this figure has only an indicative value. It is based on indications by country covering a range of fields; in some cases processing operations are included, while in others they are not (Hishamunda, 2014).
The proportion of women depends on the production mode and the type of occupation. Internationally, most of the women are found in small-scale, low capital intensive operations, in charge of all tasks. They are less present in modern industrial units, where men dominate (Monfort, 2015). Bodil Maal noted that in Norway modern aquaculture “industrialisation, vertical and horizontal integration, may potentially exclude local communities, rural people and especially women from the aquaculture sector” (Maal, 2013). Over the 20 years and more of salmon farming development, from 1990 to 2010, Norway, the world’s leading producer of salmon, experienced a 600 percent increase in farmed Salmo salar production. In the same period (from 1994 to 2010), the employment of women decreased from 20 percent in 1990 to 9 percent in 2010. There are several reasons for that decline in the employment of women. The industry has evolved from family businesses, in which women often held part-time jobs, to modern, integrated, capitalistic corporations hiring more professional employees. In the meantime, Norway’s coastal areas have benefited from an expansion in job opportunities, offering better job conditions to women than aquaculture (Pettersen and Alsos, 2007).
We have also examined women’s role in decision-making in the Norwegian and Faroese aquaculture. Norway and the Faroe Islands are world-leading in corporate governance when it comes to salmon aquaculture. Norwegian-run and Faroese-run companies account for around half of the top 20 largest salmon farmers in the world. Mergers and acquisitions have affected the composition of aquaculture companies, especially in the salmon business, and some of those companies now operate transnationally or worldwide. It may be incorrect to say that transnational companies like that have a “nationality”, even if they were founded in the Norway or Faroe Islands – but their identity and corporate culture are still influenced by the place where they were established.
As at many transnational, vertically integrated companies, the corporate structure becomes more diverse in the sense of intercultural. However, gender diversity does not always follow suit. For instance, a company owned by Mitsubishi, Japan, exhibits a glaring gender imbalance, with nine out of ten global managers and all board directors being male. That is not such a good look from a gender equality perspective.