Written by Natalia Freitas, for Atuna.com
The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) certification process was critically targeted by marine scientists such as Jennifer Jacquet and Daniel Pauly from the University of British Columbia Fisheries Center, in an article entitled “Seafood Stewardship in Crisisâ€, published on September 2nd by Nature magazine.
Today, another issue of the magazine is out with three reactions backing up MSC certification for seafood worldwide. “Marine stewardship: a force for goodâ€, “Marine stewardship: fair and impartial†and, finally, “Marine stewardship: high bar for seafood†appear at the correspondence section and are signed by scientists, WWF and Moody Marine UK.
They all focus on MSC’s impartiality, integrity and positive effects on several fisheries around the world. MSC’s CEO, Mr. Rupert Howes, gave his comments about the critical review earlier received to Atuna.com in the interview below.
Atuna.com: Five fisheries experts are signing the article “Seafood Stewardship in Crisis†published by Nature magazine. Did you have any idea such joint work was being done? What do you believe to be the main goal of such article?
Rupert Howes: Where the bar is set for determining sustainability can be a contentious issue. The MSC’s standard of a sustainable and well-managed fishery represents a broad scientific consensus, agreed between 1997 and 1999 by over 200 marine biologists, scientists, environmentalists and other stakeholders from around the world. The MSC is in regular contact with Daniel (Pauly) and Jennifer (Jacquet) and their feelings on forage fisheries and bottom trawling are well-known. They have expressed these views both in public and in private so the opinion piece simply airs many of the views they have discussed in other media. The MSC exists to bring about change in the way we fish at the global level and to do that, it is essential that we work with the more complex – and often, more contentious fisheries. MSC welcomes constructive stakeholder comments and continuing to improve the Standard is one of our highest priorities. I believe a good fishery management also includes the rebuilding of stocks that have fallen below the levels required for Maximum Sustainable Yield and the MSC recently issued new guidance on re-building depleted fisheries – which will address the concerns raised about the hake and pollock fisheries made by those scientists.
Even though MSC methods are highly criticized in this particular article, lots of suggestions for improvement are also given by Dr. Pauly and others. Does MSC agree with any of them? If yes, is MSC considering implementing any?
The MSC isn’t resting on its laurels and we have number of improvements in the pipeline that address many of the concerns raised in the article. As part of the MSC’s role, we update the Standard on a regular basis and I believe that there will always be ways in which we can continually improve the Standard and its implementation. The MSC is based on a high level of stakeholder involvement and receives suggestions and advice on a daily basis through our Technical Advisory Board and the Stakeholder Council. At the moment we are conducting research into the effectiveness of the program in assessing low-trophic-level fisheries (stocks of usually small species that are preyed upon by larger species) and – while early results suggest that the program is assessing these fisheries very capably – I am sure that the work will lead to further improvements in the Standard.
The article gives the impression that all sustainable fisheries (being small, artisanal or not) should be certified by MSC, and not only the ones that seek commercial benefits with the certification. Keeping that in mind, what’s the fundamental role MSC should have on today’s fisheries in your opinion?
I agree! I look forward to the day when all of the sustainable fisheries are certified. The key challenge is identifying those sustainable and well-managed fisheries and this is where MSC assessment can make an essential difference.
While small-scale fisheries are often – as the article notes – sustainable, it is important not to try to link small and sustainable or attempt to pre-judge fisheries based on their scale or aesthetic charms. Small fisheries can be overfished and often do not have the resources that are so important for effective management. Funding is available from Governments, NGOs and industry to allow small-scale fisheries to enter assessment and, as a result, size is not a barrier to assessment. Over the past ten years, we have seen fisheries certified from 7 tons to over a million tons get certified (such as the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands Pollock).
The MSC is a market-based program and, working with our partners and industry leaders, we are trying to create a market for sustainable seafood. That requires an incentive for those fisheries that can demonstrate their sustainability. It is vital that we reward sustainable practices with real incentives once they have been recognized and through that, the MSC and our partners are contributing to the health of the world’s oceans.
It is well known, and also pointed out in the article, that MSC certifications have increased quite a lot in the past four years. Do you believe that the commercial benefits of it could ever surpass the environmental awareness among companies and consumers?
The environmental, social and economic benefits experienced by the certified fisheries (and identified in our publication, Net Benefits) clearly demonstrate the symbiosis between the commercial case and the environmental case for certification.
The rate of certifications and new assessments has increased enormously over the past four years and it is a tribute to the work and effort of those certified fisheries and the 20-plus Certification Bodies carrying out the assessments. Certified fisheries have experienced improved market access – such as the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Alaska cod fishery – now supplying frozen fillets into Germany – and (in some cases) improved prices – such as the NESFC sea bass in the UK – reporting premiums of up to 25% when selling their MSC certified fish into top London restaurants. At the same time, management measures by the New Zealand hoki fishery – in response to low stocks and a condition of certification – have resulted in the rebuilding of the stock from historically low levels.
The article suggests to readers that MSC’s partnership with Wal-Mart was one of the major reasons MSC certifications boomed. Could you tell us about the objective of such partnership?
Wal-Mart’s commitment to selling MSC certified seafood was a landmark for the MSC and for sustainable fisheries across the world. By committing to sourcing MSC certified sustainable seafood, Wal-Mart sent a message back down the supply chain that has helped to encourage more fisheries to enter MSC assessment and open themselves to rigorous, 3rd party scientific evaluation. Many of the certified fisheries attract conditions their certification - action plans for further improvement. The message that Wal-Mart sent with their landmark commitment is having a huge impact on the marine environment and – starting next year – we will be measuring the impact of the certified fisheries through a new independent study into the environmental benefits of the MSC program.
Although Wal-Mart is the largest retailer to commit to sourcing MSC certified sustainable seafood, they are not the only one. Our partners around the world – such as Loblaws, J Sainsbury and Edeka are increasingly using MSC certification to clearly identify those fisheries that can demonstrate they are fishing sustainably. Their support is vital to encourage new fisheries to start assessment and to continue rewarding those fisheries that have already been certified.
MSC is seen as one of the most reliable ecolabels nowadays, but still gives room for such criticisms. How is your organization working to become stronger and resistant to different interpretations of what should be considered sustainable?
There will always be those who have a different interpretation of what is sustainable but the MSC Standard is an open and transparent process and debate on the subject is healthy and – while not always comfortable – can lead to improvements in the program.
The DNA analysis and traceback analysis recently carried out for us show that MSC Chain of Custody is still hugely successful with no negative results in the analysis. We have now extended the DNA testing program to ensure that the MSC ecolabel continues to provide business and end-users with the assurance that the seafood they are buying can be traced back to a sustainable and well-managed fishery.
The MSC is still a young organisation – only 10 years old last year – yet the progress we have made is extraordinary. Independent surveys and analysis – such as that recently published by WWF – consistently place the MSC ecolabel as the most-trusted indicator of seafood sustainability but it is vital that we do not become complacent. We are always aware that no system is perfect and there will always be room for improvement. What is clear is that the MSC program and its partners in the fishing and seafood industry are bringing about real, measurable change that will, I believe, ensure that our seafood supplies are safeguarded for this and future generations.
