Eating whale (Japan, Norway, Iceland)

01A dish for some, a scandal for others

In Japan, Norway and Iceland, whale meat appears - in a more or less residual way - on the menu of certain restaurants, in markets or at family tables. For much of the West, by contrast, eating it is a moral taboo: the whale is the very emblem of the environmental cause. The misunderstanding is head-on and reciprocal: the Western visitor, horrified to see "whale" on a menu, reads a slaughter into it; the local host sees a legal food tradition and a foodstuff like any other. Here the taboo is not religious but cultural and political.

02The moratorium and its three exceptions

In 1982, the International Whaling Commission (IWC) voted a moratorium on commercial whaling - quotas brought down to zero - which came into force with the 1985/86 season on the high seas and in 1986 for coastal whaling. Three countries nevertheless continue. Norway lodged a formal objection to the moratorium: it is therefore not bound by it and has openly hunted the minke whale since 1993. Iceland left the IWC in 1992, returned in 2002 with a reservation, and resumed commercial whaling in 2006 (fin whale and minke whale). Japan, for its part, long conducted so-called "scientific" whaling; on 31 March 2014 the International Court of Justice held that its Antarctic programme JARPA II was not conducted "for purposes of scientific research"; Japan then left the IWC (withdrawal effective on 30 June 2019) and resumed commercial whaling in its own waters on 1 July 2019.

03Consumption in free fall

The paradox is that, where it is legal, whale is eaten less and less. In Japan, this meat was a major source of protein in the post-war years - fried whale (kujira no tatsuta-age) was a staple of school canteens - with a peak of around 233,000 tonnes in 1962 (Associated Press); it has today fallen to a few thousand tonnes a year - a minute fraction of that peak - and most Japanese almost never eat it. In Norway, a 2021 survey indicated that about 2% of inhabitants eat it often, none among those under 35. The practice therefore owes more to tradition, to industry and to food sovereignty than to mass demand.

04Which whale, and in what state?

Not all whales are equal from a conservation standpoint, and the confusion is frequent. The minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata), the mainstay of Norwegian, Icelandic and Japanese coastal whaling, is classed as "Least Concern" by the IUCN - abundant. The fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus), the second largest animal on the planet after the blue whale, hunted in Iceland, is classed as "Vulnerable". The sei whale, included in Japanese quotas after 2019, is "Endangered". It is this variety of statuses - from the abundant to the threatened - that fuels the debate: the "sustainable hunting" argument holds for the minke whale, far less so for the large species.

05The misunderstanding (and what must not be confused)

The Western tourist who orders "just to try", or who loudly expresses indignation before a whale stall, runs into a mismatch of values: what he takes for a crime, his host takes for a meal. The offence travels in both directions - serving whale to an environmentally minded guest, or denouncing a local custom in front of the person who practises it. One clarification, finally, to avoid a common confusion: the Faroese grindadráp - the drive hunt of pilot whales (small cetaceans) in the Faroe Islands - is a distinct community hunt, neither governed by the IWC moratorium nor practised by the three countries covered by this entry; equating it with the rorqual hunting of Japan, Norway or Iceland is a frequent error.

Geography of misunderstanding

Historical origins

Manger de la baleine est un tabou moral dans une grande partie de l'Occident mais une tradition alimentaire légale au Japon, en Norvège et en Islande. Le moratoire de la CBI (adopté en 1982, en vigueur en 1985/86-1986) est contourné par la Norvège (objection), l'Islande (réserve) et le Japon (retrait de la CBI en 2019, après l'arret de la CIJ du 31 mars 2014 sur JARPA II). La consommation s'effondre la ou elle est legale (Japon : de ~233 000 tonnes en 1962 a quelques milliers de tonnes aujourd hui).

Documented incidents

• 2014 — Le 31 mars 2014, la Cour internationale de justice juge que le programme baleinier antarctique japonais JARPA II n'est pas mené « à des fins de recherche scientifique » au sens de l'article VIII de la convention, et ordonne au Japon de révoquer les permis en cours et de n'en délivrer aucun nouveau. (CIJ, Chasse à la baleine dans l'Antarctique (Australie c. Japon ; Nouvelle-Zélande intervenant), arrêt du 31 mars 2014, affaire no 148.)
• 2019 — Le 1er juillet 2019, au lendemain de son retrait effectif de la Commission baleinière internationale, le Japon reprend la chasse commerciale dans ses eaux ; les deux premiers petits rorquals sont débarqués à Kushiro, première prise commerciale ouverte depuis une trentaine d'années. (Retrait du Japon de la CBI effectif le 30 juin 2019 ; reprise de la chasse commerciale le 1er juillet 2019 (première prise : deux petits rorquals à Kushiro).)

Practical recommendations

Neutral alternatives

• Si l'on refuse de goûter, le dire simplement et sans jugement moral appuyé.
• S'informer du statut de l'espèce servie plutôt que de réagir au seul mot « baleine ».

Sources · 7