Fisheries • Volume 2 • Number 3 • October 2008
Seals of approval: Eco-labelling and sustainable fisheries
by Caitlin Zaino
Discuss this articleShare your views with other visitors, and read what they have to say
Global fish stocks are in distress: one-quarter of the world’s stocks are overexploited, depleted, or recovering from depletion, one-half are fully exploited and at or close to their sustainable limits, and 69 percent of the world’s major fish species are in decline. If fisheries continue on this trend of poor management, global fish stocks risk being depleted beyond repair within the next forty years. There is thus clearly a need for a solution that maintains productivity while improving fisheries management and the conservation of marine biodiversity.
One such solution that is being offered is eco-labelling of fish. Much like labelling of other food and consumer products, a fishery product bearing an eco-label logo signals that the product has been produced in accordance with certain environmental standards. Eco-labelling of fisheries products is generally calculated on the basis of criteria that assess, principally, the level of stock of the particular species, the environmental impact of the product on the marine environment, and how stocks are managed to respond to changing fisheries populations.
So, how exactly does a seemingly simple label serve to halt irreversible damage to global fisheries?
Advocates of eco-labelling schemes argue that they create market-based incentives for environmentally friendly products, thereby achieving sustainable development objectives making use of market measures. By providing consumers and retailers with more information on their products eco-labels raise environmental awareness. As more consumers call for products incorporating these standards, producers are motivated to meet these demands to gain a competitive advantage in the industry, add value to their product, and gain access to growing ‘green markets’. In the end, eco-label advocates say, political support for more sustainable and responsible fisheries production and management is generated.
Eco-labelling is not as straightforward as it may seem, however. There are several different labelling schemes and ensuring that they all meet sustainable standards can be a challenge. In response, in 2005 the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation’s (FAO) Committee on Fisheries (COFI) developed guidelines for eco-labelling fish products. “We have seen a proliferation of eco-labels on various products, some of which have little credibility, confused consumers, caused unfair competition in the market place, and did not promote sustainable practices,” said Ichiro Nomura, the FAO Assistant Director General for fisheries. “These are the kinds of challenges that the guidelines on eco-labelling of marine-capture fish products recently adopted by COFI can help address.”
The FAO eco-labelling guidelines outline general principles to govern such schemes, including the need for transparent, accurate, and independent auditing of standard-setting and accountability, and the need for standards to be based on reliable science. These principles provide guidance to governments and organisations that maintain eco-labelling programmes—such as the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC)—and they outline minimum requirements and criteria for assessing whether a fishery should be certified and awarded an eco-label. Some examples of what is assessed includes the levels of fisheries stock for the targeted species, what impact the fisheries activities have on the marine environment, such as on the ocean floor, and how management systems that are in place will respond to changing fisheries populations. The entire process of certification takes, on average, 14 months and involves a wide range of stakeholders from the fisheries industry, environmental NGOs, marine scientists, and governments.
While schemes such as that promoted by the MSC and the FAO have met with success, there is concern over the challenges these programmes pose for poorer countries and small, artisanal fisheries, particularly in developing nations. Fisheries are a vital source of income in developing countries: net revenues from fish trade exports by developing nations is greater than that earned from their exports of tea, rice, cocoa, and coffee combined. The economic importance of fishery industries in these countries is further compounded by the reliance of communities and fishermen on fisheries for their livelihoods.
Signing up to eco-labelling schemes poses several challenges for developing countries and small and artisanal fisheries. With less access to financial resources and technical capacities, these vulnerable populations may lack the capacity to bring their fisheries production into line with eco-labelling criteria and standards. If global demand for fisheries products carrying the logo continues to grow, thereby decreasing the demand for non-eco-labelled goods, this could seriously threaten developing country producers and restrict market access. Here, the competitiveness of countries unable to meet or afford foreign labelling and certification standards risks erosion. In this case, the burden falls disproportionately on small and artisanal suppliers. Finally, from a trade perspective, there is concern that labelling schemes constitute a form of disguised protectionism.
While the concerns expounded here are similar to those often raised with regard to other eco-labelling schemes, the fisheries industry has made efforts to not repeat the same mistakes. The FAO guidelines acknowledge the hurdles that poorer countries face in responsibly managing their fisheries because of a lack of financial and technical resources, as well as the particular challenges posed by the small-scale fisheries typical of many developing nations. The FAO guidelines, therefore, call for financial and technical support for poorer countries to help them implement and benefit from eco-labelling schemes. Likewise, the MSC recently initiated a pilot project to help bring in small scale developing country producers through the establishment of a methodology that will assess fisheries levels and other data that is necessary for certification on a smaller scale. Results for this pilot project are expected sometime in early 2009. It is hoped that through this project, developing country and small scale fisheries can overcome the current barriers to certification, such as limited data on stock levels.
Advocates for the schemes argue that eco-labelling holds potential for developing countries’ fishery industries. Incorporating these standards presents opportunities for these producers to add value to their product, expand their market reach, and increase export revenues. They could also provide new opportunities for investment and joint ventures, something already witnessed in countries that have formed regional partnerships in order to bring industries into line with eco-labelling standards. At the moment, however, the proportion of certified fisheries producers based in developing countries remains low. Over the next several months, it is hoped that the efforts to further engage these producers will help yield significant results both financially, as well as environmentally.
Moreover, marine conservationists argue that if fisheries are more sustainably and responsibly managed as a result of eco-labels and seafood resources are protected, this is economically beneficial to developing countries that rely on fisheries for their livelihoods and food security in the long run. Fisheries management serves to protect the future of these fishing communities, say supporters.
The challenge for stakeholders—including governments, industry, and civil society—is thus to produce positive environmental outcomes in fisheries. They must promote sustainable fisheries, responsible management, and marine biodiversity conservation, while also protecting industries and communities, particularly in developing countries, from discrimination and economic disintegration. International efforts and global guidelines, such as those led by the FAO, are vital for achieving these objectives. However, global dialogue must continue; stakeholders from developed and developing nations need to engage with one another in future and current eco-labelling discussions and standards-setting to ensure that the needs of the most vulnerable societies are met and that support is provided for these communities to guarantee that sustainable and responsible fisheries management practices are implemented worldwide.
Caitlin Zaino is Assistant Editor, ICTSD Publications
3 responses to “Seals of approval: Eco-labelling and sustainable fisheries”
Add a comment
Enter your details and a comment below, then click Submit Comment. We’ll review and publish the best comments.
Hello.
Think that the article highlights many of the relevant issues; it however, and has this in common with the majority of pieces on fisheries eco labels, ignores the big elephant in the room - which is the failure, or more realsistically the percieved faliure, of fisheries management to achieve the objective of sustainably managed and utilised stocks, whether that be detrmined on basis of biological, economic or bio-economic criteria . I’m still confused as to how an eco label, such as MSC, can succeed in establishing the sustainability of a particular stock of a particular species in a particular location; when conventional wisdom suggest that one of the causes of the difficulties and sometimes failures in fisheries management lies inside the boundaries of precisely this level of ‘micro managment’ in terms of stock, species and location. The incentives provided to an applicant for certification are clear enough, but what about the wider fisheries community that might have some less than direct interaction with that stock, species or location. Would it massively incorrect to draw the inference that in some circumstances, where one species that occupies either a trophic or locational niche is deemed to satisfy the requirement for eco label certification, that by implication, other species concurrently exisiting within the same ecosystems might also be, if utilised, sustainably managed?
70% of MSC certified products consist of overexploited to depleted (hoki, hake, pollock, toothfish, icelandic mackerel) bottom trawled groundfish used to make fishfingers. Bottom trawling of groundfish is one of the most devastating fishing practices as it impacts seabed trawling corals, sponges, endangered species of sharks and skates in the hundred thousands. All the above (overfished status and unsustainable impact on the seabed) is evidenced by the audit reports available on MSC website itself. MSC was founded by Unilever. Friend of the Sea, alternative scheme to the MSC and currently the main certification scheme in the world in terms of metric tons certified, managed to grow certifying lower impact fisheries and NOT bottom trawled groundfish fisheries or overexploited stocks. There is spread concern among many serious environmental NGOs such as Greenpeace about the certification as sustainable of products originating from overexploited bottom trawled stocks. All this should be considered carefully by all those interested and concerned about marine habitat conservation.
Is there a price premium for ecolabelled products as claimed by the proponents of eco labels? If at all there is a price premium how one can substantiate this?