Ecolabelling

Koushik
M.Sc. 3rd sem
SIF,CUSAT

 There is broad consensus in the international
community that many of the world’s
commercial fisheries are in distress.

 Eco-labelling schemes are increasingly
perceived as a way simultaneously to maintain
the productivity and economic value of
fisheries while providing incentives for
improved fisheries management and the
conservation of marine biodiversity.

 the scientific basis of the criteria proposed for
fisheries eco-labelling schemes;
 the attitude of consumers toward such
schemes;
 and the potential impact of such schemes on
international trade in fish and fishery products
 In particular, there are concerns that eco-
labelling schemes may cause discrimination
against fish exports from developing countries
and countries with economies in transition

 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea
 1995 UN Agreement on the Conservation and
Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and
Highly Migratory Fish Stocks (Straddling
Stocks Agreement)
 1993 FAO Agreement to Promote Compliance
with International Conservation and
Management Measures by Fishing Vessels on
the High Seas (Compliance Agreement).

 1995 FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible
Fisheries.
 Agenda 21 of the UN Conference on
Environment and Development(UNCED) held
in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil .
 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity..
 1973 Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
(CITES).

 All eco-labelling schemes share the common
assumption that purchasing behaviour of
consumers is not just motivated by price and
mandatory quality and health standards.
 Rather, product attributes taken into account
by consumers can relate to environmental and
ecological objectives as well as economic and
social objectives.

 Eco-labels are seals of approval given to
products that are deemed to have fewer
impacts on the environment than functionally
or competitively similar products.
 The rationale for basic labelling information at
the point of sale is that it links fisheries
products to their production process.

 The goal of eco-labelling initiatives is to
promote sustainably managed fisheries and
highlight their products to consumers.
 Product claims associated with eco-labelling
aim at tapping the growing public demand for
environmentally preferable products.
 Eco-labels generally rely on life-cycle
assessment to determine the environmental
impact of a product ‘from cradle to grave’.

 First party labelling schemes:
 These are established by individual companies
based on their own product standards.
 The standards might be based on criteria
related to specific environmental issues known
to informed consumers through the media or
advertising. This form of eco-labelling can also
be referred to as ‘self-declaration’

 Second party labelling schemes:
 These are established by industry associations
for their members’ products. The members
elaborate certification criteria, sometimes by
drawing upon external expertise from
academia and environmental organisations.
 Verification of compliance is achieved through
internal certification procedures within the
industry, or employment of external certifying
companies.

 Third party labelling schemes:
 These are usually established by a private
initiator independent from the producers,
distributors and sellers of the labelled
products. Products supplied by organisations
or resources that are certified are then labelled
with information to the consumers that the
product was produced in an environmentally
friendly’ fashion.

 The label (seal) is typically licensed to a
producer and may appear on or accompany a
product derived from a certified fishery or
producer. Producers are usually expected to
track the chain of custody’ of their products in
order to ensure that the products derived from
the certified fishery are in fact those that are so
labelled.

 Environmental organisations and consumers
generally prefer eco-labelling schemes of this
type because of the heightened confidence that
private commercial interests will not
compromise the criteria applied to the schemes
and strict compliance with them based on
verifiable and impartial certification
procedures.

 Provide information about the environmental
impact of products and enable more informed
purchasing behaviour by consumers and
intermediaries.
 Provide consumers with the opportunity to
express their environmental/ecological
concerns through their purchasing behaviour
and the market mechanism (e.g., dedicating
their buying power to ‘green catches’).

 Encourage retailers and consumers to buy only
fishery products that come from sustainably
managed resources.
 Raise environmental standards in the
production of the commodity.

 Generate price differentials between eco-
labelled products and those that either do not
qualify for ecolabeling, or those whose
producers do not seek to obtain such labelling.
 Enhance incentives for producers to supply
products that meet the eco-labelling criteria in
order to receive greater returns (a ‘green
premium’) or gain market share for their
products.
.

 Provide competitive advantages, market access
or greater market share for fisheries products
derived from sustainably managed fisheries.
 Generate greater support by industry and other
interested parties for improved fisheries
management

 There are already several national,
international, industry-sponsored, NGO-led
and consumer-supplier partnership
certification and standards schemes under
development in the fisheries sector.

In many instances, producers have sought to
gain competitive advantage by drawing
attention to the origin of fish through labels.
Moreover, the labeling of fish by origin and
species is promoted by governments in some
instances as a way to enable more effective
tracking and identification of fisheries products
to aid fisheries management.

 A variety of producers in the United States
have made self-declarations that their tuna is
‘dolphin safe’. The Dolphin Protection
Consumer Information Act (DPCIA) of
1991established criteria for the manner in
which tuna must be caught.
 (On a voluntary basis, companies can then
label their tuna to be ‘dolphin safe’.)

 Friend of the Sea (FOS) has its origins in the
Earth Island Institute. Set up in 2006, its
founder is also the European Director of
Dolphin Safe. It covers both wild and farmed
fish and its criteria also include requirements
related to carbon footprint and “social
accountability”.

 Certification is based on the sustainability of
the stock, rather than whether the fishery is
sustainably managed. Its certification
methodology is based on existing official data
in terms of stock assessment.

 The FoS certification Program for wildcapture
fishery is generally based upon the following
criteria:
 target stock should not be overexploited;
 no by catch of endangered species;
 maximum 8% discard;
 no impact on seabed;
 compliance with regulations (TAC, no IUU etc);
 social accountability requirements;
 gradual carbon footprint reduction.

 For the farmed products the criteria are in
general:
 no impact on critical habitat (mangroves,
wetlands, etc);
 escape and bycatch reduction;
 compliance of water quality parameters;
 no GMO, growth hormones or harmful
antifoulants;
 gradual carbon footprint reduction.

 Friend of the Sea says it will not certify stocks
that are “overexploited” (based on FAO
definitions of levels of exploitation), fisheries
using methods that affect the seabed and those
that generate more than 8 per cent discards.
Certification is undertaken by independent
third-party certifiers.

 Friend of the Sea claims to be “the main
sustainable seafood certification scheme in the
world” covering some 10 per cent of the
world’s wild capture fisheries.

 Sharat Industries, Nellore has it’s white leg
shrimp certified as sustainable by Friend of
Sea.
 The company’s brood stock is imported from
the Oceanic Institute in the US under the
supervision of the Coastal Aquaculture
Authority(CAA) and according to the
regulations of the Livestock Importation Act
and Central Government guidelines.
 The company was the first company in India to
start the cultivation of white leg shrimp.

 There are also efforts underway by fishing
companies in some parts of the world to label
fish as farmed or wild, and more recently to
win marketing niche with so-called ‘organic
seafood’. Organic labeling usually signifies that
food has been produced without artificial
inputs—especially synthetic fertilizers and
pesticides—and has been grown using
environmentally sound farm management
techniques.

 When you’re shopping for organic foods in the
U.S., look for the “USDA Organic” seal. Only
foods that are 95 to 100 percent organic can use
the USDA Organic label.
 100% Organic – Foods that are completely
organic or made with 100% organic
ingredients may display the USDA seal.
 Organic – Foods that contain at least 95%
organic ingredients may display the USDA
seal.

 Made with organic ingredients – Foods that
contain at least 70% organic ingredients will
not display the USDA seal but may list specific
organic ingredients on the front of the package.
 Contains organic ingredients – Foods that
contain less than 70% organic ingredients will
not display the USDA seal but may list specific
organic ingredients on the information panel of
the package.

 European Union Australian
Canadian

 The MSC is an independent, not for profit,
international body headquartered in London,
UK. It was initiated by the World Wide Fund
for Nature (WWF) and Unilever, a large fish
retailer, to promote sustainable and responsible
fisheries and fishing practices worldwide.


 317: Fisheries engaged in the MSC program
 219: Certified fisheries
 98: Fisheries in assessment
 Another 40 to 50 fisheries are in confidential
pre-assessment

 Together, fisheries already certified or in full
assessment record annual catches of around 10
million metric tonnes of seafood. This represents
over 10% of the annual global harvest of wild
capture fisheries.
 The fisheries already certified catch over 7 million
metric tonnes of seafood. This is over 8% of the
total wild capture harvest.
 Worldwide, more than 20, 000 seafood products*,
which can be traced back to the certified
sustainable fisheries, bear the blue MSC eco label.

 The MSC runs the only certification and
ecolabelling program for wild-capture fisheries
consistent with:
 The ISEAL Code of Good Practice for Setting
Social and Environmental Standards, and
 The United Nations FAO guidelines for
fisheries certification.

 MSC STANDARD FOR SUSTAINABILITY
 Fisheries can demonstrate that their
practices are sustainable by getting certified
to the MSC environmental standard for
sustainable fishing.
 Successful certification gives an assurance
to buyers and consumers that their seafood
comes from a well managed and sustainable
source.

 MSC STANDARD FOR TRACEABILITY
 MSC’s Chain of Custody standard for seafood
traceability ensures that only seafood from a
certified sustainable fishery carries the MSC
eco label.
 It means that consumers and seafood buyers
can have confidence that the fish they are
buying can be traced back to a fishery that
meets the MSC environmental standard for
sustainable fishing.

 The MSC ecolabel is the globally recognised
mark for Sea Food that can be traced back
through every step of the supply chain to the
well managed and sustainable fishery that
caught it.

 The MSC ecolabel reflects that, they are fishing
sustainably, implementing good management
practices and minimising their environmental
impact. By opting to use the MSC logo,
producers of fishery products are expected to
give consumers the option to buy fishery
products that have been derived from
sustainable, well managed fisheries.

 M/S H.T FOODS, Kakkanad, Kochi was the
first unit to be certified against MSC COC
standard. Now M/s Gadre Marine, Veraval
and M/s Choice Canning Company , Kochi are
also certified against this standard.


 MAC, a non-profit international organisation
based in Hawaii (U.S.A.), brings together
representatives of the aquarium industry,
hobbyists, conservation organisations,
government agencies and public aquariums.
MAC aims at conserving coral reefs by creating
standards and educating and certifying those
engaged in the collection and care of
ornamental marine life from reef to aquarium.

 It is working to establish standards for ‘best
practices’ in the supply of marine aquarium
organisms; an independent system to certify
compliance with these standards; and
consumer demand and confidence for certified
organisms, practices and industry participants.

 A few individual fishing companies have created
their own ecolabels. For example,the Spanish
group Pescanova, one of Europe’s largest fishing
companies, which fishes globally and has interests
in the processing sector, has created a logo that
appears on a limited range of its packaged
products. The logo states that the fish concerned
has been caught in a way that “preserves the
aquatic and marine ecosystem for maintaining the
quality, diversity and availability of fish resources
for today and future generations”. This in-house
scheme claims to be based on the Code.

 The Japan Fisheries Association, an umbrella
group for some 400 fishing companies, founded
the Marine EcoLabel-Japan (MEL) in December
2007. The MEL operates as a non-profit part of that
association. It could be seen as a response to a
developing interest in ecolabelled fish and seafood
in the Japanese market. Indeed the stated rationale
behind the label was to “respond to the situation
proactively and establish their own ecolabelling
scheme, which is most suitable to the situation of
the Japanese fisheries”. As of January 2010, only
three fisheries have been certified to the fledgling
label. It is likely to have significance only in the
Japanese market.

 Recently, some public authorities, most notably
the Government of France and Iceland, have
set up their own ecolabels.The Government of
France has chosen to create its own national
ecolabel and related certification scheme. This
decision was based on a feasibility study
undertaken in2008 by the French authority,
FranceAgriMer.

 RFS and GAA, headquartered in the U.S.A.,
have announced a joint eco-labelling scheme to
recognize industry commitment and
participation in responsible fisheries and
aquaculture
 The merger brings over 200 companies and
individuals from 19 countries together in an
effort to promote sustainable seafood harvest
and production worldwide.

 Environmental labels and declarations are one
of the tools of environmental management,
which is the subject of the ISO 14000 series.
 This series does not prescribe environmental
performance levels. Rather, to claim
compliance with ISO 14000 standards, firms are
required to establish an environmental policy
and to set targets and objectives for
environmental management performance.

 ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITIES
 Many governments and industry groups recognise that eco-
labelling could provide needed economic incentives for better
long term stewardship and availability of natural resources
important for national economic welfare.
 Eco-labelling schemes can provide countries one tool to help
them fulfill commitments made under international
agreements on important environmental imperatives such as
responsible fisheries and the conservation and sustainable use
of biological diversity.
 .

 The fundamental rationale for eco-labelling is,
after all to generate political support for
improved environmental management and to
raise environmental standards through
consumer choice.

 Labelling provides one of the least-coercive
market-based mechanisms to improve
conservation outcomes.
 Private sector interest in eco-labelling for
fisheries products in both developed and
developing countries is growing, especially
given the business and export opportunities
eco-labelling has generated in some other
sectors.

 Moreover, as already noted, it is the potential
for growth in the market share of eco-labelled
products that makes eco-labelling a compelling
business choice.
 If fisheries management improves in response
to efforts to comply with certification criteria,
the potential benefits to fisheries in both
industrial and developing countries could go
far beyond higher revenues which ecolabelled
products may generate.

 Eco-labelling presents an opportunity to add
value to existing products, expand reach in
existing markets, or maintain market share in a
competitive environment.
 Product differentiation could be a way for
some exporters to enhance their export
earnings and eco-labels could be one source of
such product differentiation.

 There are also hopes that eco-labelling could
provide new opportunities for attracting
capital investment and joint ventures in
developing countries
 Eco-labelling is seen by some as an important
element for gaining access to new premium
green markets (e.g.,market access).

 Eco-labelling can also provide an opportunity
for innovative producers to benefit from the
use of more environmentally-friendly
production methods.

 In a world in which the demand for fishery
products are increasing in leaps and bounds,
and the pressure on the natural resources are
rising, eco-labelling appears to be a possible
way to bring about a greater degree of control
and sanity in the system.
 --------

Ecolabelling

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to Ecolabelling

More from Koushik Das

Recently uploaded

Ecolabelling