The Japan Times (JT) article, Busy auctions mask Tsukiji decline (cached), also includes strange descriptions.

Indeed, beginning from the phrase "Tsukiji decline" of the title, this report is misleading, as observable from comparison between the two graphs below:

The first graph indicates that the annual total volume of national fishery production dropped off by half in two decades, after reaching a peak in the late 1980s. This basic fact is not widely shared by public in this country. It is obvious that the shrinkage is not due to decrease of needs for fish, considering from other facts. Firstly, the shrinking rate is far greater than the decreasing one of the volume handled at Tsukiji, as shown in the second graph. Then, time lag is too great between the start of meat consumption increasing in the 1960s, when Japan enjoyed high economic growth, and that of natural fishery production decreasing in the 1980s.

The JT article cites the volume handled at Tsukiji decreased by 33 percent in two decades. But it is unfair to tell this without mentioning that the country's total quantity of marine products dropped off by 50 percent during almost identical period. Then, can't one say that Tsukiji has been rather bravely making great efforts to sustain business, despite the severe resource conditions?

Who can gain profits by calling Tsukiji "declined"? The undervaluation of Tsukiji would cover people's attention from the TMG's failing in the relocation, as well as from its promoting structual changes in fishery distribution, favoring big capitals. Apart from that, one may well wonder if the TMG has ever said "decline", when it asserts that Tsukiji is too narrow, as one of the reasons for relocation.

JT:
The volume of marine products it handles has been falling as retailers shift away from procurement via wholesalers or middlemen at Tsukiji.

Another, more serious cause of the fall is the drastic decrease of natural fishery resources, as mentioned above. The retailers who can "shift away" are bigger capitals. It is essential for a majority of consumers to be able to buy fresh fish at smaller shops in their neighborhood, in order to curtail time between purchase and intake. Even though there is the biggest fish shop of Japan in Tokyo, who does dare to go by Shinkansen to buy sashimi there from other districts?  Since recent years, however, smaller retailers have been decreasing, expelled by bigger capitals. So, many of elderly people and other vulnerables have difficulties with access to remote shops or supermakets. This is one of the reasons why the fish consumption is falling.

JT:
Meanwhile, more and more Japanese are choosing to eat meat rather than fish.

This is a too much simplified expression of complicated real matter. Consumers have not always come to dislike fish. Various surveys show that the most favorite dish of children is sushi. Mediterranean recipes of sea foods are very popular among a wide generation. In addition, people never forget health problems with meat, due to BSE, cholesterol, unsaturated fatty acid etc.

But the problem faced by the weaks is as pointed out above. People are not yet enough informed of new and easier way to cook fish in a microwave oven.

Also, considering from the shrinkage of natural fishery resources, it is clear that one cannot easily lower fish price. But big capitals are to think of this in other way. In order to attract consumers, they want to curtail retailing price by getting rid of middle traders, as well as by pressuring fishermen via wholsalers to minimise producers' price.

Lower price obtained in such a way is best for consumers? No. Firstly, manipulated directly or indirectly by big capitals, the wholsalers essentially specialise in refrigerating and distributing services to handle items in bulk, so that they have no skill to evaluate individual fish, other than to classify by size and origins. It is consequently a gamble for retailers to buy what quality of fish from them. Such a matter might be no great problem for bigger retailers to buy in larger quantity, but it is crucial for smaller fish shops in one's neighborhood, of which signification is mentioned above.

Secondly, lower producers' price undermines reproduction base, as leads to consumers' disinterests in a long term. Instead, middle traders have the skill to evaluate individual fish, so as to offer the maximum price for fishermen and ensure fish quality for retailers. Those who merely emphasise decrease of the middle traders, and who ignore the traditional "fair trade", can be regarded as having a will to destruct this system, for profits of big capitals.

JT:
Fisheries Agency and market officials say such retailers as restaurants and supermarkets are increasingly buying fish directly from fishermen or trading companies. In 2006, just 62.1 percent of fishery products were traded through wholesale markets like Tsukiji, down from 75 percent in 1989, according to farm ministry data.

"In other words, more fish are traded outside the wholesale market nowadays," said a Fisheries Agency official.

Even if stated by any authority, not all the factual descriptions of a social phenomenon can be affirmative. The above-described tendency means the penetration of big capitals into the fishery distribution. If this is an affirmative matter for everyone, it should have been pointed out, even though merely suggested by the next paragraph.

 JT:
Starting about 20 years ago, a major supermarket chain based in Fukushima began directly buying from producers and trading companies. Now it buys nearly half its fish from outside the wholesale markets.

This is no natural phenomenon. It proves that the author of this article has no critical eyes that a sheer journalist should do.

JT:
"If we purchase fish via (wholesale) markets, it would be more costly," an official at the major retailer said on condition of anonymity.

Lower cost is not always best in view of the foresaid fair trade. But it must be best for big capitals. Assuming this point, the "official" said as above on condition of anonymity?

JT:
In addition, the fish are apt to lose their freshness during the trip from the markets, the official said.

Even if the "trip" is curtailed, how many of consumers will come to eat sashimi for breakfast or lunch? Who does go to fish shop in the busy morning? The pleasure to take sake with sashimi cannot be moved from the evening or night. Apart from that, some fish, including tuna, require no full freshness.

JT:
"It is better for us to directly bring in (fish) from producers to our (distribution) center," he said.

Who is "us"? - big capitals? Is it better to be able to buy dirt cheap, so as to make fishermen poorer, while the natural resources have been drastically shrinking?

JT:
Even among the retailers still using Tsukiji, things are changing.

This is a fact. But it is a task for a journalist to write clearly what is positive or negative, and for whom so.

JT:
Despite their popularity with tourists, few retailers participate in the fish auctions anymore. Instead, many buy directly from wholesalers in one-to-one negotiated transactions called "aitai torihiki."

This is either misunderstanding or disinformation. No retailers originally have the right to participate in the fish auctions, which are traditionally shared by wholesalers and middle traders only. According to terminology of Tsukiji, "aitai torihiki" signifies dealing between wholesalers and middle traders without intermediate of auctions. In this JT report, whether intentionally or not, there might be some conceptual confusion with other case of goods, such as shares of stock, of which "aitai torihiki" means the negotiated transactions made outside of market.

Anyway, such a negative campaign by massmedia goes unchallenged, due to Japan's unusual Press Club system, as pointed out at the bottom of one of our blog entries.