The Namibia Fish Consumption Promotion Trust (NFCPT) operates 18 shops in 17 towns covering the 14 regions of the country. This operation is bolstered by two takeaway locations in Swakopmund and Ongwediva that serve as retail points for high-quality and reasonably priced frozen fish and fish products. 

The Trust, established in 2001, is tasked with the mammoth responsibility of encouraging a traditionally red meat-eating population to incorporate a healthy and affordable fish diet into their culinary preference. 

Victor Pea (VP) has been at the helm of Trust for the last nine years. He recently sat down with New Era’s Head of Business and Lifestyle, Edgar Brandt (EB) for an exclusive interview to discuss the history, performance and expectations for the Trust. 

EB: Tell me more about the mandate of the Trust, sir. 

VP: I think the mandate of the Trust is definitely in the name. As you can see, we are called the Namibia Fish Consumption Promotion Trust. And essentially, that’s sums up what we are all about. We are created by the government, obviously, under the Ministry of Fisheries and Resources. The responsibility that wase given to us is really to create a culture or to try to create a culture of incorporating fish in our diet as Namibians. This came as a result of an observation, by the government of the day at the time, that Namibia was lagging behind in terms of per capita fish consumption compared to the rest of the world. 

EB: Can you give us a brief history of domestic fish consumption and how this compares to the rest of Africa and the rest of the world? 

VP: In the 1990s, at Independence, Namibians consumed roughly four kilograms of fish per person per year. And you can just imagine how much beef and mutton and other types of protein we consume. 

Our domestic fish consumption figure was one of the lowest, not only in the world, but also in Africa. Despite the rich ocean we have, we tend to feed the rest of the world with fish while we don’t really benefit from fish as such, as a nation. And of course, we also know that fish is a healthier source of protein. This situation warranted government to come up with an initiative to try to address such low consumption of fish in Namibia. 

Just for complete information, Africa at the time was consuming between 5 and 9 kilograms, while we ate 4 kilograms, despite Namibia being one of the major producers of fish at the time. Then in 1993, the government, with the assistance of the Japanese government, then created what was then called the Namibia Fish Consumption Promotion Project. 

EB: What are the current duties of the Trust? 

VP: What we do is create awareness and educate the public. We educate them on the health benefit of consuming fish, because some people just really don’t know why they should eat fish. The other things we do is teach people what to do with the fish. 

Because to some people they really don’t know what do with the fish if you give them a raw fish. There are people who don’t know. They might want to consume it but they just don’t know how to prepare it. 

For instance, when you go to a region such as Omaheke and you prepare fish, people will eat it. 

But if you ask them why they don’t eat fish at home? They admit they don’t know how to prepare fish. 

We literally have a chef taking people through all the preparation steps, from cleaning to cutting and removing the guts to different ways of preparing the fish. That is part of our education. 

EB: How do you ensure that Namibian fish is accessible to the general public? 

VP: That is the second component of our mandate. Part of the difficulty is 

you really don’t see fish being traded on a regular basis like beef or lamb or goat. 

So, the other aspect is to ensure that as many Namibians have access to the product as possible. To achieve this, we have established various fish shops in all the regions of the country. Of course, Namibia is huge and one shop per region probably is not sufficient, but at least that’s how far we’ve gone. 

There are some regions such as Erongo, Kharas, Khomas and Oshana which have more than one fish shop, but at least every region is covered. 

EB: What steps does the Trust take to ensure the affordability of Namibian fish for the various communities? 

VP: Affordability is a very sensitive topic, especially for me as a CEO. Because affordability to the consumer is to pay the lowest price possible. But the consumer does not understand what it costs to take the fish from the ocean to the plate in a good condition. 

What we are saying as a Trust, is that we deliver the fish at the most cost-effective price possible. This is because obviously as an organisation, we need to recover our cost as we have various overheads and of course even the fish itself, it doesn’t come out of the ocean free. One have to procure a service of a vessel to harvest the quota, and vessel consume fuel, there is a crew that need to get paid, and our own employees that are managing fish shops. 

EB: How successful would you say the Trust has been in fulfilling its mandate? 

VP: I think we have done quite a lot in terms of awareness creation and education. But of course, there is always room for improvement. This is particularly true for regions that are traditionally practicing animal husbandry, such as Omaheke, Kunene, obviously //Kharas and Hardap region. 

There is still a lot of work that needs to be done in those regions. But in general, I would say we have succeeded in creating and planting that seed to consume fish into the Namibian community. 

EB: How does the price of fish compare to other domestic sources of protein? 

VP: The average price of fish that we sell in our shop is around N$26/kg, but of course there are premium fish products that would cost more than that. Now if we compare to other meat products such as beef averaging N$74/kg; pork N$85/kg; lamb N$88/kg and poultry at N$42/kg, one can clearly see that fish is by far much cheaper in comparison. 

But I also recognise that affordabiluty is subjective and personal based on the indivudyal economic situaiton and liquidity. 

EB: Are there any adjustments or changes to your implementation strategy you are considering? 

VP: I think going forward we are going to have targeted interventions. We will try to focus more on the regions that are still lagging behind in terms of knowledge and consumption. 

EB: What are some of the major challenges in fulfilling your mandate that you have encountered thus far? 

VP: One of the challenges is culture. You know culture is a very difficult thing to penetrate or to create a new culture. Because if I grow up seeing lamb being slaughtered and eating it, that is the only thing I see. Now I am hearing others eat fish. Culture I think is one of the biggest challenges in terms of getting the message across. Because obviously by incorporating fish into your diet on a regular basis, it becomes part of your culture. So, we are actually creating a new culture. 

Obviously, another challenge remains accessibility. As much as we say people should consume fish, Namibia is wide. And you find that there are some remote areas where it is just not feasible to put up a fish shop. So, the geographical vastness of the country and of course the population is a challenge in terms of setting up sustainable fish shops. 

And of course you always have limitations in terms of resources while another factor is really the increased cost of doing business in Namibia. This is not only affecting affordability, but also the speed at which we might be able to expand. 

EB: Despite the fact that the Trust is a non-profit organisation, you’ve been able to steadily increase your revenue. What is your current level of revenue and how have you managed to consistently increase it over the last couple of years? 

VP: Essentially for any business to succeed, you need to be sustainable. And you can only be sustainable if you don’t consume everything that you make. So, meaning, every ounce of revenue we generate doesn’t necessarily need to be spent in operations. If we can expand, we can only expand if we have money left over for capital investment. And hence, yes, we are not seeking profit but we are fully cognizant of the need to generate our own revenue. 

This is necessary not only to sustain the business operations, but also for expansion purposes. Hence, despite being non-commercial it is quite necessary for us to generate surplus. 

I’m sure you are aware that businesses go through cycles. There are good years, then there are bad years. Like this current year, we are literally running on a loss. So, how can we continue to operate? Because we have a reserve. And now during tough times, this reserve is there to ensure we are able to continue. 

This is possible due to our deliberate efforts to ensure we build a sustainable reserve. However, we didn’t build this reserve by just increasing prices, instead we managed to build our reserve by being efficient and increasing the volume of fish we sell through our operations. 

EB: That is quite impressive, particularly from a state entity. What are some if the key factors that improved your efficiency? 

VP: We actually eliminate waste in our operation. Also, I believe we are one of the few State-Owned Enterprises that are not overly capacitated in terms of human resources. Even in terms of expansion or new recruits, we did not retrench anyone but we reallocated resources. This is because we are trying to ensure we are as cost effective as possible. 

Another factor is that we have increased our productivity. I remember when I started, we were selling around about between 5 000 and 7 000 metric tons. But we’re getting 15 000 metric tons of quota, which means some of the quota were then offloading it through a usage fee. 

For me this has unlocked the value that was already in the quota. Through that, we then were able to generate sufficient revenue to cover our overheads and at least have some surplus left. 

Now we are harvesting 10 000 tonnes out of the 13 000 tonnes. This means only three tonnes is being offloaded through usage fee. This usage fee in turn actually subsidizes the harvesting of the quota to a certain extent. 

Specifically, consumers who are further afield are actually getting a subsidized price at our fish shops because our retail prices are the same regadless of the distance from the ocean.