Exploring Marketing Channels in Fisheries

Every time a consumer picks up a fresh fish fillet at a market, that product has likely passed through several hands before reaching them. The pathway it travels – from the fisher who caught it, through traders and processors, to the final point of sale – is what we call a marketing channel. In the fisheries sector, these channels are especially critical. Fish is one of the most perishable food commodities on the planet, and how it moves through the supply chain directly determines whether it arrives fresh, affordable, and in good condition – or not.

What are marketing channels? 🔗

A marketing channel is the established route through which a product moves from its point of production to the final consumer. According to the FAO, key activities in a fisheries value chain include fishing or aquaculture production, processing, transport, wholesale, and retail marketing – and food loss can occur at any stage. The choice of channel impacts cost, the speed of distribution, market reach, and ultimately the quality of the product that arrives at the consumer’s table.

In fisheries, marketing involves all activities in the flow of fish from the farmer to the consumer, including assemblage, storage, sorting, grading, packaging, labeling, and transportation. Each of these functions is carried out by different agents – producers, cooperatives, wholesalers, retailers, and vendors – who together form the marketing channel.

Types of marketing channels in fisheries 🔗

Marketing channels in fisheries are generally classified by their length – that is, by the number of intermediaries between the producer and the consumer. Each type has distinct implications for cost, efficiency, and market reach.

Direct marketing channel (zero-level channel) 🔗

In a direct channel, the fisher sells the catch straight to the consumer with no middlemen involved. This can happen at local fish landing sites, roadside stalls, community markets, or through Community Supported Fisheries (CSF) programmes where consumers subscribe to receive fresh fish directly from fishing households. Research on direct seafood marketing in the United States identified five types of direct marketing channels, including Direct to Consumer, Direct to Retail, Direct to Restaurant, and Direct to Institutions. While this channel maximises the fisher’s profit share by eliminating intermediaries, it demands considerable effort in managing logistics, sales, and distribution.

Short indirect channel (one-level channel) 🔗

Here, one intermediary – typically a retailer – sits between the producer and the consumer. The fisher sells the catch to a retailer, who then sells it directly to the public. This is common in the Philippines, where fish marketing channels are notably shorter than those for other agricultural products. In the Philippines, a majority of fish traders – around 70% – obtain their supply directly from fish producers, reflecting a relatively short and efficient distribution structure.

Long indirect channel (multi-level channel) 🔗

This is the most common channel structure in many developing countries. It involves multiple intermediaries: collectors or beparies, commission agents or aratdars, wholesalers, paikers, and retailers. In Bangladesh, the dominant marketing channel for freshwater fish follows the route: farmer → bepary → aratdar → paiker/retailer → consumer. This channel covers both primary and secondary markets and can extend across wide geographic areas. While it enables fishers to reach broader markets, it also increases costs and extends the time fish spends in transit – a serious concern given its perishability.

Key players in fisheries marketing channels 🔗

Understanding who operates within these channels helps clarify how costs accumulate and how prices are set at each stage.

Fishers and fish farmers 🔗

Fishers are the primary producers who supply the raw product entering the marketing channel. In Bangladesh, fish farmers typically receive only 8-10% of the total sale proceeds from their catch, while bearing transportation costs to the first market level. This low producer share reflects the number of intermediaries extracting value along the chain.

Collectors and assemblers 🔗

Fish collectors aggregate small volumes from multiple farms or landing sites and transport them to assembly markets. In Thailand, around 35% of total fish production is sold to collectors at primary markets, as most small-scale farmers find it impractical to transport modest volumes directly to wholesale centres. Collectors play a vital bridging role, particularly for small producers lacking market information.

Wholesalers 🔗

Wholesalers purchase fish in bulk and redistribute to retailers or other intermediaries. Terminal wholesale markets in major cities serve as hubs where fish products are channelled to consumers, restaurants, and hotels through trade between wholesalers and retailers. Products handled at this level can include fresh, frozen, dried, smoked, and live fish. In Thailand, wholesalers’ profit constitutes roughly 7-10% of the retail price, while the total marketing margin across the chain accounts for approximately 35% of retail value.

Agents and brokers 🔗

Agents and brokers facilitate transactions between fishers and buyers without physically handling the fish. Their role is to bridge the gap between areas of fish abundance and scarcity, negotiating prices and connecting producers with the best available markets. In many auction-based systems – such as at Bangladesh’s Chittagong harbour – brokers call auctions on behalf of sellers, though they earn relatively high commissions for services that involve minimal cost.

Retailers 🔗

Retailers are the final link in the channel, selling directly to consumers through fixed stalls, fish markets, supermarkets, or mobile vendors. A key incentive for retailers is to sell fresh fish quickly, since any delay reduces quality and forces price reductions. In Thailand, retailers earn the highest profit margins in the chain – around 14% of the retail price – largely because they perform labour-intensive tasks such as cleaning, gutting, and cutting fish at the point of sale.

Factors influencing channel choice 🔗

Not every fisher or fish farmer chooses the same channel. Several factors shape that decision.

Perishability 🔗

Fish deteriorates rapidly after harvest, making speed and cold-chain infrastructure the most critical factors in channel selection. Challenges such as perishability, inadequate processing facilities, and poor quality control are among the most pressing issues in fish marketing, and channels that reduce handling time and maintain low temperatures are strongly preferred. Longer channels with multiple handling stages increase the risk of spoilage and lower the final product quality.

Market reach 🔗

Direct channels work well for local markets, but reaching regional or international consumers typically requires longer, multi-level channels with established logistics networks. In India, marketing efficiency varies from 34% to 74% depending on channel length, with marine species achieving higher efficiency than freshwater species because they travel shorter distances with fewer intermediaries.

Cost and profit margins 🔗

Every additional intermediary in a channel adds cost. The cost of fish products is directly proportional to the number of agents involved, as each agent extracts a margin. In Mymensingh, Bangladesh, the total marketing cost from farm gate to consumer stands at around Tk 661 per quintal of mixed fish species, with aratdar commissions constituting the largest share, followed by transportation costs.

Infrastructure and access to credit 🔗

Fishers with poor access to transport, ice, or storage are often dependent on collectors and agents who have the capital and logistics to move fish quickly. This dependency can weaken the fisher’s bargaining position. The fisher is often the least informed party in the transaction, isolated from market price signals and sometimes dependent on advance loans from intermediaries – which ties them into selling through those same agents.

The rise of digital and direct-to-consumer channels 🔗

Technology is reshaping fisheries marketing channels in significant ways. E-commerce platforms now allow fishers and small producers to reach consumers directly, bypassing traditional intermediary layers. In South Korea, e-commerce already accounts for 15% of fresh salmon sales and nearly 30% of mackerel, with direct delivery to consumers’ doors becoming a marker of quality and trust.

In Japan, online platforms allow fishers to photograph their catch at landing and post it for real-time bidding, with products arriving fresher than through traditional auction channels. Electronic recording of sales also ensures full traceability – something increasingly demanded by both regulators and consumers.

For producers in developing countries, e-commerce platforms offer the opportunity to reach European and global markets with better price transparency and access to niche segments. Digitalisation also helps producers gather data on production, pricing trends, and buyer preferences – information that has historically been concentrated at the intermediary level rather than with farmers and fishers.

Why effective marketing channels matter 🔗

The structure of a marketing channel determines far more than just where fish ends up. It shapes the fisher’s income, the consumer’s price, the quality of the product, and the overall efficiency of the fisheries sector. Food loss and waste can occur at every stage of the fisheries value chain – from harvest through processing, wholesale, and retail – and better-designed channels can significantly reduce these losses. Shorter, faster, better-cold-chain-supported channels preserve quality, reduce waste, and improve the fisher’s share of the final price.

At the same time, longer multi-level channels are not inherently inefficient – they extend market reach, enable bulk aggregation, and connect remote producers to urban and export markets. The key is that each intermediary in the channel should be adding genuine value: through aggregation, cold storage, quality grading, processing, or distribution – not merely extracting a margin while slowing the product’s journey.

What do you think? If you were advising a small-scale fisher on choosing between selling through a multi-level channel with broad market reach versus a direct-to-consumer model with higher margins but greater logistical demands, which factors would you prioritise – and why? And as digital platforms reshape how fish moves from boat to table, do you think traditional intermediaries like wholesalers and agents will continue to play a meaningful role, or will their functions become obsolete?

References

1. https://www.fao.org/flw-in-fish-value-chains/value-chain/en/
2. https://medcraveonline.com/JAMB/marketing-of-fish-products.html
3. https://www.sciencedirect.com/article/abs/pii/S0308597X24001866
4. https://www.fao.org/4/y2876e/y2876e09.htm
5. https://www.fao.org/4/y2876e/y2876e1k.htm
6. https://www.fao.org/flw-in-fish-value-chains/value-chain/wholesale/en/
7. https://www.fao.org/flw-in-fish-value-chains/value-chain/retail/fresh-fish-retail/markets/en
8. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/46535009_Domestic_Fish_Marketing_in_India_-_Changing_Structure_Conduct_Performance_and_Policies
9. https://weareaquaculture.com/news/seafood/e-commerce-set-to-become-the-primary-sales-channel-for-seafood
10. https://www.seafoodsource.com/features/ecommerce-making-tokyos-famed-fish-markets-obsolete
11. https://www.cbi.eu/market-information/fish-seafood/tips-go-digital