ecolabel child page has been integrated into main NGO page

In generating awareness about the importance of sustainable fisheries among consumers in developed countries, it is important to tie this into economic markets by establishing an ecolabel that is stamped onto fish that has been harvested from a fishery with good practices. By distinguishing sustainably-caught fish from fish that is harvested from declining stocks, we can encourage consumers to support companies that work to maintain the fisheries instead of exploiting them. The success of sustainable goods in the market today can be seen in the current market for organic and fair trade products. The dolphin-safe campaign provides evidence that labeling, coupled with awareness, can indeed have an affect on consumer behavior.

As of right now there are several groups that "certify" and put a label on sustainable fish, the most prominent of which is the Marine Stewardship Council, an independent, non-profit organization based in the UK. Established in 1999 as a joint effort between industry (Unilever) and conservation (WWF), the MSC has certified 857 products as of September 2007 (MSC 2007). A major issue the MSC faces is the lack of publicity: because so few sustainable fish products exist and the council is independent of other larger conservation groups, the lack of name recognition has made it more difficult for the MSC to advertise the advantages of the ecolabeled products. Before the MSC began to market its products, a survey conducted in the U.S. in 1998 showed that only 5 percent of those polled would trust the MSC as a certification agency, compared to 23 percent for WWF and 49 percent for the National Marine Fisheries Service. Since then, markets such as Wal-Mart and Whole Foods have pledged to sell MSC-certified products (Gunther, 2006), which will undoubted have an impact because the two retailers tend to tailor to two very different types of consumers, but many other markets have yet to realize that by doing business with sustainable fisheries, they are insuring that their fish supply will not collapse in the future.

Meanwhile, the Global Aquaculture Alliance, another international NGO, has outlined standards for "best aquacultural practices," detailing measures that include property rights, biodiversity protection, environmental management, and food safety for both shrimp farms and shrimp hatcheries. Guidelines are also given for seafood processing plants. Foods processed at facilities that meet these standards are granted certification from the Aquaculture Certification Council, Inc.

We believe it would prove more effective for these organizations, and any other labeling intiatives that may form, to unite their efforts. This way the group could gain global trust and standardized labels could be provided for easy recognition of the meaning of the ecolabel. This model can be taken after the Fairtrade Labelling Organizations International, which brings together 20 different labeling initiatives under one name and one logo.

FLO International also plays an overarching role in linking the suppliers of fair trade products-such as the various producer organizations representing small farmers in Africa, Asia, and Latin America-to retailers and consumers in North America, Europe, and Australia. While the producers of sustainable fish can come from both the fisheries of both developed and developing nations, the sustainability label, like the fair trade label, will be targeted mainly towards consumers in developed countries who are most appealed by the "feel-good factor" and are most likely to be able to afford the luxury. The list of countries where MSC labeled food is currently sold is largely consistent with the countries that have fair trade intiatives. When Alaskan pollock received its MSC certification in 2004, Richard Muir, the president of Genuine Alaska Pollock Producers, expressed his hopes that the label would help the marketing group, and cited Europeans in particular as strong supporters of sustainable products (Alaska Pollock Press Release, 2004).

Regarding the design and labeling criteria, we propose a three tier system, consisting of red, yellow, and green labels. The red label will indicate a product from an unhealthy, unsustainable population which if possible should not be eaten. The yellow and green labels will indicate fish that are being fished in a sustainable manner with the difference being that they yellow labeled fish come from populations that have not yet completely recovered while the green labeled fish come from populations that have reached half of caring capacity and are being fished at or slightly below maximum sustainable yield. We would encourage choosing green labeled fish over those with yellow labels, and strongly discourage any consumption of red labeled fish.

One obstacle that still stands in the way is money. Seventy-five percent of the MSC's funds comes from charitable grants (MSC, 2005), which, if too scarce, severely puts a limit to the size and scope of the labeling program. A part of the remainder of the money comes from profits from the licensing fee the MSC charges companies for the use of the label; the actual certification process is conducted and paid to a third party certification program. It would cost a company anywhere from $35,000 to $500,000 for the assessment of their facilities and fishing methods in order to qualify for certification (MSC, 2005), and the use of the logo costs a base fee plus 0.5% of the profits.


-- Global Aquaculture Alliance: Best Aquaculture Practices. Retrieved November 21, 2007 from http://www.msc.org/HTML_support/logo.gif

-- (2004). Alaska Pollock Marketing Group Says MSC Certification will Strengthen Marketing Efforts. Retrieved November 21, 2007, from http://www.alaskapollock.org/images/MSCCertification.pdf.

-- (2007). About MSC. Retrieved on November 18, 2007, from http://www.msc.org/html/content_462.htm.

Gunther, M. (2006). "Saving Seafood: Wal-Mart has unsentimental business reasons for promoting sustainable fishing practices." CNNMoney.com Retrieved November 22, 2007, from http://money.cnn.com/2006/07/25/news/companies/pluggedin_gunther_fish.fortune/index.htm.

MSC Executive. (2005). Information Sheet 4: Costs Explained. Retrieved November 22, 2007, from http://www.msc.org/assets/docs/fishery_certification/InfoSheet4_Costs.pdf.

Teisl, M.F., Roe, B. & Hicks, R.L. (2001). "Can Eco-labels Tune a Market? Evidence from Dolphin-Safe Labeling." Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol 43.

Wessels, C.R., Donath, H. & Johnston, R.J. (1999). "U.S. Consumer Preferances for Ecolabeled Seafood: Results of a Consumer Survey." Retrieved November 21, 2007, from http://www.uri.edu/cels/enre/docs_CRoheim/ecolabel.pdf

  • No labels

2 Comments

  1. Should this section go in the International Cooperation?

    LISA made these comments about Fair Trade fish: does Fair Trade ever work? Use coffee as an example. People feel good when they drink fair trade coffee. ie, people say "I drink so much Starbucks, but at least it's fair trade." But if Starbucks didn't use fair trade coffee---people would still drink it, because it tastes good! Also, most people who want coffee just need it. They will buy it whenever convenient. How many people actually refuse to buy coffee when they need it, just because the coffee shop doesn't have fair trade? How much more will fair trade fish cost? If I'm a poor college student, I'd rather buy $3/lb non fair trade fish than $10/lb fair trade fish...your plan might work on a subset of environmental-minded people, but for the general public...

    1. These are valid comments only when one assumes that "Fair Trade Fish" will cost significantly more than non-FTF.  Consider the example of coffee, the cost to the consumer of Fair Trade Coffee is equal to that of high-quality organic coffees.  And such coffees only cost marginally more (on the order of 60 cents more per pound) than cheap, "garden-variety" coffees.  (Also, there is significant overlap in the price ranges...given the fluctuation in coffee prices."

       
      The point is, Starbucks uses fair trade coffee because it costs the same as its former high quality coffee AND because it makes their customers feel good.