The Crisis Beyond Canned Tuna: The "Great Fish Migration" Shaking Kiribati's Economy

When picking up a can of tuna from the supermarket shelf, few people consider where the fish came from. Tuna, which is affordable, long-lasting, and versatile enough for salads and rice balls, is a staple on tables worldwide. However, behind this commonplace food, a quiet change is underway that could determine the future of a small Pacific island nation.

The stage is set in Kiribati, a country consisting of 33 islands scattered near the equator in the Pacific Ocean. Even when combined, its land area is only about the size of New York City. However, Kiribati's maritime domain, or exclusive economic zone (EEZ), spans approximately 3.4 million square kilometers, surpassing the land area of India.

This ocean has been the backbone of Kiribati's economy. It is rich with migratory tuna species like skipjack, yellowfin, and bigeye, attracting fishing vessels from Japan, China, the United States, and the European Union. These foreign vessels purchase licenses from the Kiribati government and operate under rules regarding catch limits and reporting obligations. For Kiribati, this license revenue is not just industrial income; it is a fundamental pillar supporting the national budget.

According to a BBC report, the Kiribati government earned $137 million from fishing license fees in 2024. From 2018 to 2022, these fees accounted for nearly three-quarters of government revenue. The International Monetary Fund's analysis indicates that this represents about 20-40% of the country's GDP. In other words, the presence of tuna directly impacts the maintenance of schools, healthcare, infrastructure, and administrative services.

However, there is a possibility that these tuna might move away from Kiribati's waters in the future. The cause is rising sea temperatures due to climate change.

Tuna are known to be sensitive to slight changes in water temperature. As sea surface temperatures rise, they migrate in search of more suitable conditions. Several studies suggest that Pacific tuna stocks may shift eastward as global warming progresses. For some island nations, including Kiribati, this means fish could move away from their exclusive economic zones.

If this change becomes a reality, the value of operating in Kiribati's waters for foreign fishing vessels will decrease. There would be little reason to pay high license fees for areas with fewer fish. Consequently, Kiribati's government revenue could be significantly affected. The Kiribati Fisheries Department estimates that if high-emission scenarios persist, fishing access fees could decrease by over $10 million annually by 2050.

While $10 million a year might seem small from the perspective of large economic zones, for a small island nation with a population of about 130,000, it is a sum that could determine fiscal stability. Moreover, unlike other countries, Kiribati does not possess mineral resources, vast agricultural lands, or industrial zones. The land is limited, with very low elevation, and freshwater resources are scarce. Diversifying the economy is not easy.

The issue extends beyond national finances; it also impacts food security.

In Kiribati, fish is deeply embedded in daily diets. According to the Pacific Community, the per capita fish consumption in Kiribati reaches about 100 kilograms annually, a level significantly higher than in the United States or Japan. Fish is not just an export resource; it is a source of protein for local communities and an integral part of their culture.

However, changes are also predicted for local fisheries. According to the BBC, even under low-emission scenarios, regional catches are expected to decline. Particularly in the Line Islands, a significant drop in catches is anticipated even under low-emission scenarios. The harsh reality is that some impacts are unavoidable, even if warming is curbed.

This change could also increase dependence on imported foods. As fish becomes harder to obtain, households may rely more on canned goods, rice, and processed foods. Imported foods are susceptible to price fluctuations and may not fully replace the nutritional benefits of a traditional fish-based diet. Especially in remote islands, where logistics costs add to food prices, rising costs could directly impact living standards.

Reactions to this issue are spreading on social media. Posts related to climate change often highlight Pacific island nations like Kiribati and Tuvalu as being "on the front lines of the climate crisis." Many are surprised by the dual threat of national income and food security being jeopardized not only by rising sea levels but also by the movement of fish.

On the other hand, there are calls for consumer responsibility. Opinions suggest that consumers should be aware of where and under what management conditions the tuna they consume as canned tuna, sashimi, or sushi is caught. There are also posts calling for sustainable fishing certifications, transparency in catch information, and accountability in the supply chain. As long as the world's dining tables depend on the Pacific Ocean, the issue is not just Kiribati's problem.

Furthermore, there is a strong reaction from the perspective of climate justice. Countries like Kiribati contribute minimally to global greenhouse gas emissions. Yet, they face the most severe impacts in the form of rising sea levels, freshwater shortages, coastal erosion, and the movement of fishery resources. On social media, the question "Why do countries with low emissions have to pay the heaviest price?" is repeatedly shared.

However, there are solutions.

The United Nations Green Climate Fund is advancing a large-scale project targeting 14 Pacific countries and territories to adapt tuna-dependent economies and communities to climate change. The project, with a total scale of $156.8 million, focuses on strengthening early warning systems for predicting changes in tuna distribution, improving fish supply to coastal and urban areas, and supporting the stabilization of government revenue.

The important aspect of this project is that it goes beyond merely lamenting the reduction of fish. It aims to scientifically predict which ocean areas fish will move to, the potential revenue loss, and which regions will face severe food shortages, and to reflect these predictions in policy.

The Kiribati government is also attempting to move away from a structure that relies solely on selling licenses to foreign fishing vessels. Efforts are underway to expand domestic tuna processing and canning to retain the added value of fish within the country. Additionally, the cultivation of milkfish, snapper, sea cucumbers, and marine agriculture is being considered. There are also attempts to broaden income sources beyond the sea, such as tourism, renewable energy, and funds utilizing overseas assets.

However, challenges remain significant. Establishing processing facilities requires electricity, water, refrigeration, personnel, and transportation networks. Developing tourism requires air routes, accommodations, and responses to climate risks. Introducing renewable energy requires funding and technology. There are limits to what a country like Kiribati can achieve on its own.

This is why the involvement of the international community is being questioned. If climate change causes fish to migrate, the traditional system of "the country where the fish are gets the license fees" is also shaken. If fish move to international waters, who benefits and who bears the losses? Resource management, fishing rights, compensation, and the redesign of international rules are necessary.

This is not a story of the future. The ocean is already warming, and fishermen are beginning to feel the change. For countries like Kiribati, climate change is not an abstract environmental issue but a reality that affects next year's budget, children's meals, hospital operations, and school maintenance.

When we open a can of tuna, we hardly imagine the ocean beyond it. Yet, in the Pacific, which produces more than half of the world's tuna, even a slight increase in sea temperature can shake a nation's finances, change people's dining tables, and lead to discussions on sovereignty and equity.

The crisis in Kiribati is not a unique problem of a distant island nation. It is a symbolic example of how climate change extends beyond the natural environment to impact national income structures, international trade, food prices, and consumer choices.

If tuna move away from Kiribati's waters, it is not just fish that will be lost. The economic foundation of a nation that has lived with the sea, the food culture of local communities, and the opportunity to correct the unfairness of "the less a country emits, the greater the damage" could also be lost.

The impacts of climate change do not only appear in glaciers and forests. They have already infiltrated our plates and canned goods.

Source URL

BBC article "How climate change threatens the economic backbone of the Pacific"
Referencing Kiribati's fishing license revenue, EEZ, the risk of tuna resource migration, impacts on local fisheries and food security, and comments from the government and experts.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cq57vxjvdy4o

Green Climate Fund "FP259: Adapting tuna-dependent Pacific Island communities and economies to climate change"
Overview, objectives, funding scale, early warning, and food security support for the project adapting tuna-dependent economies in Pacific island nations to climate change.
https://www.greenclimate.fund/project/fp259

Pacific Community "Pacific Assessment Reveals How Climate Change Is Recasting Fisheries and Aquaculture"
Referencing the impacts of climate change on Pacific fisheries and aquaculture, changes in tuna resource distribution, and pressures on each country's EEZ.
https://www.spc.int/updates/news/media-release/2025/11/pacific-assessment-reveals-how-climate-change-is-recasting

Nature Sustainability "Pathways to sustaining tuna-dependent Pacific Island economies during climate change"
Referencing research indicating the possibility of tuna resources decreasing and moving to international waters under high-emission scenarios for small Pacific island nations.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-021-00745-z

FAO "Kiribati - Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles"
Referencing country profiles on Kiribati's fisheries and aquaculture, the importance of tuna fishing, and background information on the fisheries sector.
https://www.fao.org/fishery/en/facp/kir

Conservation International "Adapting Tuna-Dependent Pacific Island Communities and Economies to Climate Change"
Referencing information on tuna-dependent economies in Pacific island nations, fish supply to coastal communities, and prediction tools for changes in tuna distribution.
https://www.conservation.org/gcf/projects/pacific-tuna

Pacifical "Social Media"
Referencing trends in social media posts about the impact of climate change-induced redistribution of tuna resources on Pacific tuna-dependent countries.
https://www.pacifical.com/social-media/

Pacific Community Facebook Post
Referencing an example of social media posts with the theme "Pacific tuna is at the frontline of the climate crisis."
https://www.facebook.com/spc.int/posts/-pacific-tuna-is-at-the-frontline-of-the-climate-crisis-and-so-are-our-pacific-c/1301039262051839/