Posted on 18 January
2010 - Gland, Switzerland – The Marine Stewardship
Council (MSC) comes out on top in a new
report commissioned by WWF that reveals
poor performance
among other assessed seafood ecolabelling
schemes and calls for improvements across
the board to strengthen their effectiveness.
Accenture’s non-profit
practice, Accenture Development Partnerships
(ADP) compared and ranked seven fishery
certification schemes that use ecolabels
on seafood products against a set of WWF
criteria that focus on the schemes’ effectiveness
in addressing the health of fisheries and
oceans.
The MSC is ranked the
highest in the ADP report, Assessment of
On-Pack, Wild-Capture Seafood Sustainability
Certification Programmes and Seafood Ecolabels,
with a score of just over 95 percent compliance
to the assessment’s criteria requirements.
Many seafood ecolabels
are inadequate
The report finds that
except for the MSC, the other assessed schemes
- Naturland, Friend of the Sea, Krav, AIDCP,
Mel-Japan and Southern Rocklobster - do
not evaluate fisheries across all criteria
to the extent required to support sustainable
fishing and healthy oceans.
“The findings of this
assessment reveal serious inadequacies in
a number of ecolabels and cast doubt on
their overall contribution to effective
fisheries management and sustainability.”
said Miguel Jorge, Director of WWF International’s
Marine Programme.
“While the assessment
shows the MSC comes out best in class using
the most rigorous programme out there, it
is not perfect. Improvements are needed
across the board to ensure all seafood ecolabels
deliver on their promise.”
Assessment of ecolabels
based on best practice guidelines
The criteria used in
the assessment reflect best practices for
fisheries ecolabelling certification schemes
with the Food and Agriculture Organization’s
(FAO) 2005 guidelines for ecolabelling forming
the basis for the criteria. Standards developed
by the International Social and Environmental
Accreditation and Labelling Alliance (ISEAL)
and elements from WWF’s framework for ecosystem-based
management of marine fisheries were added.
The assessment points
to significant differences in transparency,
information availability, structure and
accuracy of claims made by each scheme.
Aside from the MSC, all other schemes assessed
have substantial shortcomings in the area
of transparency and information provision.
“The growth of seafood
ecolabels over the last ten years attests
to the strong demand from consumers and
seafood companies who want seafood from
better fisheries.” added Jorge.
“But with the proliferation
of ecolabels and the variability of these
schemes there is a real risk of confusion,
or worse still a lack of confidence in seafood
ecolabelling among buyers and consumers.”
Working with the seafood
industry to protect life in the oceans
As part of WWF’s efforts
to implement sustainable fishing practices
globally to protect marine life and ocean
habitats, the conservation organization
works with major seafood buyers to use their
purchasing power to secure seafood from
sustainable sources and assess their current
supply chain. The report is intended to
address confusion expressed by this group
and inform their choices.
The most credible ecolabelling
schemes accepted in international fora are
voluntary, third party, operated independently
and involving interested parties.
Seafood ecolabels should
reflect on their contribution to marine
conservation
In addition to fisheries
certification scheme efforts to address
sustainable fishing, other issues including
carbon footprint, animal welfare and social
issues such as worker’s rights are growing
in public consciousness. WWF calls on the
seafood ecolabelling community to develop
internationally agreed criteria for these
priority issues and establish evaluation
mechanisms.
“We recommend
the assessed schemes reflect on their contribution
to marine conservation and use the report
as a guide to how best to assess and evaluate
fisheries seeking their ecolabel.” added
Jorge.
