Elsevier

Marine Policy

Volume 33, Issue 4, July 2009, Pages 654-660
Marine Policy

The emergence and effectiveness of the Marine Stewardship Council

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2009.01.002Get rights and content

Abstract

This article examines the influence of patterns of emergence on the effectiveness of the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC)—a leading wild-capture fisheries certification program. Looking first at the origins and features of this program, direct effects are examined by describing the adoption of the scheme and the impacts of the fishery assessment process. In assessing broader consequences, the article examines patterns of adoption and certification effects that were not necessarily intended or anticipated. The article concludes that fisheries certification alone is unlikely to arrest the decline of fish stocks, and highlights the need for more research on the intersection of private and public efforts to address overfishing and environmental harm resulting from fishing.

Introduction

Certification schemes have emerged in recent years as particularly vibrant sources of standard setting and governance in the fisheries sector [1]. These certification schemes go beyond voluntary codes of conduct and self-regulatory modes of governance, in that they involve the development of prescriptive standards for certification, which require behavioral changes and independent verification of compliance. This article examines how patterns of emergence influence the effectiveness of the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC), a leading wild-capture fisheries certification program.

Understanding patterns of emergence is interesting in its own right, but it is also fundamental to assessments of effectiveness, because producers self-select into voluntary certification schemes. Certification schemes may, for example, have consequences that were not intended or anticipated by their initiators. One such consequence is the favoring of large-scale over small-scale operations, which benefits organizations that can take advantage of economies of scale. Another consequence is the favoring of developed-country over developing-country producers, because of their varying capacities to participate in these schemes. A distinction should be made, then, between the direct effects of a certification scheme and the broader consequences that flow from the emergence of that scheme [2]. Using a narrow definition of effectiveness, fisheries certification would be judged effective if it contributes directly to the resolution of problems it was created to address (overfishing, environmental harm resulting from fishing). Yet a broad conception of effectiveness would consider not only direct effects, but also environmental, social, and economic effects that were not necessarily intended or anticipated. This study examines both the narrow, problem-solving effectiveness and the broader consequences of fisheries certification.

Section snippets

Single-species eco-labels and seafood-ranking guides

Social movement activism and consumer concern were key drivers behind the first eco-labeling initiatives in the fisheries sector. The inadvertent capture of non-target species (by-catch) such as marine mammals and sea turtles is a serious problem in fisheries management, but it can be resolved or alleviated by adopting special fishing gear and methods. Mounting public concern over the substantial dolphin by-catch by tuna fisheries helped to prompt the formation of the first dolphin-safe

Government and industry responses to the MSC

In spite of MSC's linkage to the FAO code of conduct and other fisheries agreements, and given the long history of international fisheries governance, certain European governments have been dubious about the scheme and have questioned the right of non-state bodies to govern common-pool resources such as fish stocks [8]. Seeing the MSC as an attempt to create a private transnational management regime beyond national jurisdiction, these governments argued that non-state actors had neither the

Patterns of adoption

By the end of 2008, 38 fisheries were certified and another 88 were in the assessment stage, accounting for merely 7% of all wild-caught seafood sales [31]. One fishery—Alaska Pollock—accounted for approximately 60% of the volume of MSC-certified fish. Following the certification of this fishery, the MSC has become a major player in the global whitefish market (hoki, hake, and pollock), supplying about one-fifth of the traded volume [32].

It is essential, however, to consider patterns of

The environmental effects of the fisheries assessment process

The ability of certification programs to modify fisheries practices to create better environmental outcomes ultimately depends on the assessment and certification processes. Analysis of environmental achievements by MSC certifications have yielded mixed results. In 2006, the MSC, in collaboration with a UK-based fisheries research consultancy, conducted a self-study of environmental gains, resulting from its certification program [38]. The study found a number of process improvements in

Conclusions

A number of process improvements in MSC-certified fisheries indicate that certification could lead to enhanced marine biodiversity conservation. But certification alone is unlikely to resolve the dire problems of overfishing and depleted fish stocks. Rather, government-sanctioned marine reserves, rules restricting access to the fish resources, stringent distributive schemes and the curtailment of illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing must be part of the solution. The regional and global

Acknowledgment

The author thanks Graeme Auld, Alf Håkon Hoel, and Olav Schram Stokke for their involvement in and contributions to the collaborative research efforts that informed this paper and Nina Colwill for her careful language editing. Funding from the Research Council of Norway and the Fridtjof Nansen Institute is gratefully acknowledged.

References (45)

  • (2004)
  • L.H. Gulbrandsen

    Creating markets for eco-labelling: are consumers insignificant?

    International Journal of Consumer Studies

    (2006)
  • M. Sutton

    Marine Stewardship Council: new hope for marine fisheries

    Samudra

    (1996)
  • L.H. Gulbrandsen

    Mark of sustainability? Challenges for fishery and forestry eco-labeling

    Environment

    (2005)
  • D.F. Murphy et al.

    In the company of partners: business, environmental groups and sustainable development post-Rio

    (1997)
  • B. May et al.

    The Marine Stewardship Council: background, rationale and challenges

  • P. Fowler et al.

    Bridging troubled waters: the Marine Stewardship Council

  • Marine Stewardship Council. MSC announces new governance structure. Press release, July 27,...
  • M. Sutton

    Marine Stewardship Council: an appeal for co-operation

    Samudra

    (1998)
  • B. O’Riordan

    Marine Stewardship Council: who's being seduced?

    Samudra

    (1997)
  • S. Ponte

    The Marine Stewardship Council and developing countries

  • S. Mathew

    Marine Stewardship Council: when sandals meet suits

    Samudra

    (1998)
  • Cited by (222)

    • The effect of habitat and fishing-effort data resolution on the outcome of seabed status assessment in bottom trawl fisheries

      2023, Fisheries Research
      Citation Excerpt :

      The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) was founded in 1997 by Unilever and the WWF due to the concern about depletion of the world’s fisheries (Constance and Bonanno, 2000; Pierucci et al., 2022). The MSC has been the most active and globally recognised entity for certification of sustainable fishing (Gulbrandsen, 2009; Bush et al., 2013), with over 250 fisheries currently certified against the MSC Fisheries Standard worldwide and an increasing number of newly certified fisheries. In 2022, this included 105 fisheries that used mobile bottom gears.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text