Go to content

Aquatic food systems, food security, and prepared­ness

This part of the report provides a detailed description of the aquatic food systems in each Nordic country. Each national chapter follows a common structure, covering primary production (capture fisheries and aquaculture), processing capacity, trade flows, and the estimated availability of aquatic foods for consumption. The chapters also outline key challenges and opportunities relevant to food security and preparedness.
Together, these country profiles provide a harmonised and comparable overview of the Nordic aquatic food system. Part 1 includes both the national descriptions and the Nordic synthesis, which integrates findings across countries.
The following sections describe the data sources, methodological approach, and limitations that apply across all chapters in Part 1. These common elements ensure comparability between countries and underpin the Nordic‑wide analysis presented in the synthesis.

Data, methods, and limitations

Estimating the aquatic food available for consumption

Aquatic food available for consumption is estimated using a harmonized approach across all Nordic countries. The indicator reflects what is theoretically available for consumption, not what is actually eaten. Storage losses, waste, re‑exports, unreported landings, and other irregularities may influence what is ultimately consumed.
All quantities are converted to live weight equivalents to allow comparison across species, product forms, and countries. Availability is calculated as:
Available for consumption = total catches – industrial catches for feed production + aquaculture production + imports – exports
Trade flows for human consumption are derived from HS Chapters 03 and 16, while products used for reduction (fishmeal and fish oil) are captured under HS 1504, 23, and 05. These codes cover the main product groups relevant to both consumption and industrial uses.

Limitations

Several limitations should be considered when interpreting the estimates:
  • Seasonality: Annual averages mask seasonal variation in catches and aquaculture harvests.
  • Data quality: National statistics may contain under‑reporting, inconsistent species coding, broad product categories, and incomplete coverage of small‑scale, informal, or unreported activities, all of which reduce the level and accuracy.
  • Conversion uncertainty: Live‑weight conversion factors vary across species and processing methods; indicative factors must often be used.
  • Product classification: Broad HS categories make it difficult to precisely assign species and processing forms.
  • Stocks, waste, and inventories: Changes in inventories, waste streams, offcuts, and by‑products are not systematically captured.
Overall, these estimates should be interpreted as indicative measures of availability, not exact measurements of consumption. They nevertheless provide a robust basis for comparing broad patterns across the Nordic region.