Lutz

1
Ilana Lutz
Professor Paul Bellew
WR 123
24 November 2015
Shark Finning and the Values of Our Society
Sharks are a species not regularly thought of outside their fictional portrayal as maneating, blood-hungry monsters. Yet even more terrifying than this man-made idea of sharks, is the
man-made idea of shark finningthe unsustainable harvest of shark fins that involves the
removal of fins from often still-living sharks, and the disposal of the remaining body back into
the ocean. Much like many other industries of today, shark finning relies on the exploitation of
natural resources, and demonstrates a system that values profit over the natural world. However,
unlike some other trades, the amount of environmental degradation and destruction caused by
shark finning is not outweighed by the positive impacts of the product produced. According to
Cemare Trond Bjorndal, author of the article Social, Economic, and Regulatory Drivers of the
Shark Fin Trade, the exact number of sharks killed each year is still unknown due to the lack of
regulation in the trade, but an estimated 26 to 73 million sharks are traded annually worldwide
(306). The majority of these sharks are killed for a dish known as Shark fin soup, an extremely
popular Asian delicacy. To understand the popularity and demand for shark fin soup, one must
examine both social and economic factors in Asian cultures, along with the values of our world as
a whole. Through all of this, new management plans can be designed to prevent the act of shark
finning, and the unnecessary destruction it brings. The ban of shark finning is a single step in the
necessary change of ideals in our society, and an example of the importance of understanding
how the destruction of the natural world will ultimately lead to the destruction of our society.
Shark finning should be universally banned because shark finning acts as an example of how our

Lutz
2
World values profit over the intrinsic value of natural life, no matter the environmental
degradation.
Shark fin soup is a traditional Asian delicacy once served to emperors during the Ming
dynasty (AD 1368-1644) that requires the dorsal fin of a shark as its signature ingredient
(Freeman 1977; Clarke 2004b). Many of the arguments for shark fin soup originate from passed
down ideas or traditions, rather than scientific proof. Bjorndal writes, The connection between
shark fins and beliefs about health and vitality play a role in market demand. Products from
animals known to be strong or fierce, such as sharks, were believed to impart strength to those
who ate them (307). This notion that humans are able to harness the strength of nature through
consumption of a strong animal has been passed down through generations. However, sharks
being tertiary consumers (at the top of their food chain) actually means higher levels of mercury
and other harmful toxins through bioaccumulation, as well as hydrogen peroxide and the
carcinogen formaldehyde, which are believed to be used as bleaching or finishing agents
(Bjorndal 308). With todays technological and scientific advances, we are able to provide new
information like this about the soup and trade, yet many still choose to value the traditional ideals
over research-based evidence. In addition to these passed down ideals, many other social
influences have helped to ensure the continued use of shark fins as an exploitable resource.
These social factors have become so normalized and accepted throughout history that
they often go unnoticed in their encouragement of the shark fin trade, and their impact on our
world as a whole. One of the main societal drives of shark finning is the notion of class or rank in
Chinese society. Bjorndal explains: Consumption of shark fin remains a status symbol by means
of the same factors of exclusiveness and exoticism that fuel demand for other rare wild animals in
Chinese society (307). Today, this delicacy still serves as a symbol of status or wealth, and
Andrea DellApa, author of the article The Influence of Culture on the International
Management of Shark Finning explains, Consumption of [shark fin soup] is associated with
prestige, and although originally included only in southern menus, [...] is now a standard dish at

Lutz
3
weddings, banquets, and corporate functions throughout China (DellApa 153). The new
availability of something once meant only for emperors allows people to partake in a once
unattainable desire, therefore increasing the overall attractiveness of Shark fin soup. As
mentioned earlier, historical or passed down traditions hugely impact the global fin trade. By
eating the same dish an emperor once did, an individual can prove their social standing, and
therefore their worth. As exemplified in certain passed down ideals such as the belief that sharks
are medicinally beneficial or that eating other powerful animals will provide health benefits,
social factors can and do promote shark finning. Caty Fairclough, author of an article entitled,
Shark Finning: Sharks Turned Prey, analyzes the slow speed of cultural change despite the
public support of government and influential figures fighting to ban shark fin soup. Fairclough
employs a 2012 survey to prove the influence of cultural and societal ideals on the shark fin trade.
She writes: Many restaurants and hotels around the world continue to sell shark fin soup. [This
survey] found that only six percent of luxury hotels in the Chinese cities of Beijing, Shenzhen,
and Fuzhou had stopped serving the dish (Fairclough 1). The impact of these social influences in
Chinese culture can be seen in the shark fin trade through the unsustainable practice based on
cultural and traditional values, rather than scientific fact or modern technological advances.
In addition to Chinese cultural influences on the worldwide decline of shark populations,
our overall ideas of sharks as man-eating, dangerous predators greatly contribute to their
dwindling numbers. Movies such as Jaws, Sharknado, 12 Days of Terror, Deep Blue Sea, and
many others portray sharks as a fearsome threat, and help promote the misled idea that a sharks
existence puts human lives at risk. In his article on the endangerment of sharks, Derek Julio
explains how just one negative portrayal of a shark in a movie can influence a majority of people
and potentially lead to aggressive and fearful attitudes towards sharks. The iconic film Jaws, Julio
explains, greatly impacted its audience with its terrifying yet fictitious depiction of sharks, and
led to a reported decline in beach attendance from coast to coast. As beachgoers fled the shores,

Lutz
4
shark trophy hunters took to the water in increasing numbers, all hoping to hunt and kill these
giant, man-eating sharks (Julio 667). The villainous portrait of sharks painted by the media both
in the past, and today, has produced unnecessary feelings of vulnerability and fear in its viewers.
This fear develops into a lack of care for sharks due to their apparent desire to harm us, and
beyond that, provokes some individuals to kill sharks solely to protect themselves from the maneating predator. In reality, these man-eating or bloodthirsty animals only account for an
average of four to six fatalities per yearglobally (International Shark Attack File). Lightning,
vending machines, and coconuts falling from trees all cause more deaths per year (National
Safety Council), but fail to face the same repercussions as sharks. Misinformation regarding the
likelihood of a shark attack, and the lack of education on the true nature of sharks and their role in
the environment has led to a fear and inaccurate basis for which our society bases its relationship
to sharks. Societal influences such as films fictionalizing sharks and turning them into terrifying
threats, news about shark attacks being reported five times more often than any conservation or
other shark-related ideas (Muter 194), and a lack of education on the importance of sharks in an
ecosystem are all responsible for a large number of people being unaware of the true impacts of
shark finning. In doing so, these social factors have helped allow shark finning to continue as a
practice, and have proven the necessity for social change towards more environmentally
conscious thinking in order to create a healthy planet for current and future generations.
In addition to these social influences, economic incentives act as a major force for the
continuation of shark finning, and Bjorndal states: Tradition, culture, and demographics in
Chinese society shape the general dimensions of the shark fin trade, but traders unanimously cite
economic vibrancy as the most important influence on the short-term profitability of their
business (309). Along with China's population growth as a whole, the growth of the middle class
has become a major factor in the shark finning industry. As previously mentioned, shark fin soup
was originally a delicacy only for emperors or the extremely wealthy: As a consequence of
liberalization and increasing spending power of the Asian middle class, the demand for shark fins

Lutz
5
has increased significantly (Fong 118). With this growth in the number of people able to
consume the dish, the number of sharks killed for their fins must increase to supply the new
demand. Looking at Chinas extreme population growth (recorded at 9.5 million per year between
2000 and 2005) and the spread of popularity from the southern provinces to almost every major
city in China helps to explain the major increases in consumption (Bjorndal 308). The economic
drive behind shark fin soup is an obvious one: as the population continues to grow, the fishermen
and restaurant owners will be able to continue making profit as long as they can meet the needs of
their customers. As a luxury good, shark fins can sell for as much as $500 per pound, giving
business owners and workers related to the trade incentive to continue. Fisherman will continue to
deplete shark populations and cause environmental destruction as long as the prices remain high,
and the demand led by personal wealth and population growth continues (Bjorndal 320). From an
economic standpoint, sharks are merely a resource to produce profit, existing solely for the benefit
of those working in the industry. However, those profiting off of the shark fin trade will eventually
run out of sharks to use. Global Catches, Exploitation Rates, and Rebuilding Options for
Sharks, an article written by Boris Worm that aims to provide accurate numbers relating to the
shark fin trade, explains how the exploitation rate (or rate at which we are killing sharks) has been
estimated between 6.4% and 7.9% per year, whereas the rebound rate (or rate at which sharks can
replenish their population) is only about 4.9% per year (Worm et al. 194). We are killing sharks
faster than they can reproduce, causing a decline in shark populations around the world.
To some, this may not seem like such a bad thing, and they may argue that we should
follow the instruction of airplane safety procedures and secure our own oxygen masks before
helping others or, in this case, take care of our own needs and well being, before the needs and
well being of nature. However, there is one major flaw in this argument: if we continue to
destroy nature as we have been, the well being of humans will have already been compromised.
In our society, nature and humanity are often separated, creating the idea that nature is only for us
to use, not for us to exist in and with. Yet as shark populations begin to dwindle, the

Lutz
6
environmental impacts of our actions will become apparent, and their harmful effects will trigger
a chain reaction. Worm states: [....] across multiple environments on land, in lakes, rivers, and in
the sea, the removal of large-bodied predators is commonly associated with large-scale changes in
ecosystems (Worm et al. 201). This chain reaction begins with a trophic cascade and the
destruction of an ecosystem, but eventually leads to issues of resource availability and our
continued survival on this planet. The decimation of our worlds largest carbon sink, the ocean,
leads to an increase in carbon, which then speeds up the greenhouse effect and, consequently,
global warming. This results in a rise in water levels, reduced rain, inability to produce crops,
extinction of many species, and an overall increase in environmental destruction. Someone
looking at this issue from an economic standpoint might still see no problem, not realizing how
this will affect any and all business with at least some relation to nature (i.e. all businesses).
Anything related to fishing or marine life will fail, as there is no longer a supply to meet
the demands. The increase in global warming will affect any crop production, any timber or plant
dependent trade, and any industry that requires water usage. The endangering or even extinction
of multiple species will prevent any business related to a single animal from thriving, and the
overall loss of resources will make production of both necessary, and luxury items, many times
more difficult. A lack of resources means the decline of businesses still able to create profit,
leading to less job availability, more people unemployed or homeless, less money in the economy,
and potential violence between nations or individuals as the necessary means to live become more
and more slim. Its easy to understand how the lack of resources makes it harder to live and profit
from the earth, yet it will only continue to get worse as time progresses. Not only
will an unsustainable society heavily affect the lives of people today, it will also damage future
generations by handing them an unhealthy world with limited resources, and passing down the
idea that valuing nature is not as important as valuing economic or social customs, therefore
continuing the cycle of habitat destruction and exploitation until there is nothing left. Mark D.
Davidson, author of the article On the Relation Between Ecosystem Services, Intrinsic Value,

Lutz
7
Existence Value and Economic Valuation, leaves the reader with a startling yet important fact,
Over the past 50 years, humans have changed ecosystems even more rapidly and extensively than
in any comparable period in human history (Davidson 171). At some point, our world must
realize the amount of destruction already caused, and the amount of destruction that can be
caused if nothing is done. Rather than act as a testament to the damage done by humans, this
statement should serve as a motivator to turn around our way of life before our planet reaches the
point of no return.
Although the consequences are severe, there are many ways to prevent this dystopian
future from becoming our own. Many bans and regulations have been put in place, but much
more still needs to be done. To properly manage the shark fin trade, it is essential to recognize the
cultural beliefs behind the Chinese/Hong Kong demand, and to take into account the continued
growth of their economies (DellApa 154). One solution, ecotourism, changes the view of nature
as a resource, and instead presents it as a desirable tourist location that serves to educate people
on the beauty and importance of nature, while also providing destinations and attractions to
stimulate local economy. DellApa explains, Shark ecotourism developed recently in numerous
locations after the realization that sharks, and their fins, are worth more alive than deadthe
shark watching industry provides direct economic benefits to local diver operators, but also
generates profits for local coastal communities by increasing demand for transportation, food,
accommodation, the sale of dive equipment, merchandise, and other activities related with
tourism (DellApa 158).
By educating the younger generations and changing the view of those that think nature is
purely a resource, we can attempt to fix the problem at its core rather than by targeting a single
vein related to it. Social change and education are the main ways we can protect our world and
vitality, and shark finning is just the beginning. By realizing that our value system is flawed,
humans can begin to create a healthier world for all of its inhabitants, and ensure a future of

Lutz
8
sustainable growth and development. Shark finning should be banned as an example of this idea,
and serve as a catalyst for a change in the way we view nature and the world in its entirety.

Lutz
9
Works Cited
Bjorndal, Cemare Trond. "Social, Economic, and Regulatory Drivers of the Shark Fin Trade."
Marine Resource Economics 22.3 (2007): 305-27. JSTOR. Web. 18 Oct. 2015.
Cini, Francesca, Luigi Leone, and Paola Passafaro. "Promoting Ecotourism Among Young
People: A Segmentation Strategy." Promoting Ecotourism Among Young People: A
Segmentation Strategy. N.p., 22 Nov. 2010. Web. 10 Nov. 2015.
Davidson, Marc D. "On the Relation between Ecosystem Services, Intrinsic Value, Existence
Value and Economic Valuation." Ecological Economics95 (2013): 171-77. Web.
"Dead or Alive: The Promise of Tourism for Shark Conservation." National Geographic. Voices
for Biodiversity, 8 May 2013. Web.
Dell'Apa, Andrea, M. Chad Smith, and Mahealani Y. Kaneshiro-Pineiro. "The Influence of
Culture on the International Management of Shark Finning. Environmental
Management 54(2) (2014): 151-61. Web. 13 Oct. 2015.
Dulvy, Nicholas K., Julia K. Baum, Shelley Clarke, Leonard J. V. Compagno, Enric Corts,
Andrs Domingo, Sonja Fordham, Sarah Fowler, Malcolm P. Francis, Claudine Gibson,
Jimmy Martnez, John A. Musick, Alen Soldo, John D. Stevens, and Sarah Valenti. "You
Can Swim but You Can't Hide: The Global Status and Conservation of Oceanic Pelagic
Sharks and Rays." Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. Aquatic Conservation:
Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 18.5 (2008): 459-82. Web.
Fairclough, Caty. "Shark Finning: Sharks Turned Prey." Smithsonian Ocean Portal. N.p., n.d.
Web. 22 Nov. 2015.
Fong, Quentin S.w, and James L. Anderson. "International Shark Fin Markets and Shark
Management: An Integrated Market Preferencecohort Analysis of the Blacktip Shark
(Carcharhinus Limbatus)."Ecological Economics 40.1 (2002): 117-30. Web. 18 Oct.
2015.

Lutz
10
Hill, Jennifer, and Tim Gale. Ecotourism and Environmental Sustainability: Principles and
Practice. Farnham, England: Ashgate, 2009. Print.
Hultman, Magnus, Azadeh Kazeminia, and Vahid Ghasemi. "Intention to Visit and Willingness to
Pay Premium for Ecotourism: The Impact of Attitude, Materialism, and Motivation."
Journal of Business Research 68.9 (2015): 1854-861. Web.
Julio, D. (2014) Circling the Blood in the Water: The Difficulties in Endangered Species
Protections for the Great White Shark. Natural Resources, 5, 666-680. doi:
10.4236/nr.2014.511058.
Muter, B. A., Gore, M. L., Gledhill, K. S., Lamont, C. and Huveneers, C. (2013), Australian and
U.S. News Media Portrayal of Sharks and Their Conservation. Conservation Biology, 27:
187196. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2012.01952.x
Worm, Boris, Brendal Davis, Lisa Kettemer, Christine A. Ward-Paige, Demian Chapman,
Michael R. Heithaus, Steven T. Kessel, and Samuel H. Gruber. "Global Catches,
Exploitation Rates, and Rebuilding Options for Sharks." Marine Policy 40 (2013): 194204. Web.

Lutz
11