The Issue
The idea that ecolabelling would lead to
improved management of marine capture fisheries is
of recent origin. It was first publicly promoted by
Unilever PLC/NV and the World Wide Fund for Nature
(WWF) at their Marine Stewardship Council
(MSC) initiative in early 1996.
The usefulness of ecolabelling in creating a
market-based incentive for environment-friendly
production was recognized about two decades ago
when the first ecolabelled products were put on
sale in Germany in the late 1970s. Since then, and
especially during the 1990s, ecolabelling schemes
have been developed in most industrialized
countries for a wide range of products and sectors.
In recent years, they have been gaining importance
in a number of developing countries, including
Brazil, India, Indonesia and Thailand. The concept
was globally endorsed in 1992 at UNCED, where
governments agreed to "encourage expansion of
environmental labelling and other environmentally
related product information programmes designed to
assist consumers to make informed choices".
Despite the international community's general
acceptance of product ecolabelling, the approach
has caused controversy in several international
fora, including the WTO Sub-Committee on Trade and
Environment and FAO's COFI. General concerns about
ecolabelling are its potential to act as a barrier
to trade and its coherence, or lack of it, with
international trade rules. More specific concerns
arise when applying ecolabelling to products from
marine capture fisheries because these have special
characteristics.
Definitions
OECD has defined environmental labelling as the
"voluntary granting of labels by a private or
public body in order to inform consumers and
thereby promote consumer products which are
determined to be environmentally more friendly than
other functionally and competitively similar
products". A distinction is usually made
between labels assigned on the basis of product
life cycle criteria and so-called "single issue
labels", and the latter are often excluded from
ecolabelling programmes. This is in accordance with
the general principles adopted by the International
Organization for Standardization (ISO) which
prescribe, inter alia, that "the development of
environmental labels and declarations shall take
into consideration all relevant aspects of the life
cycle of the product". The product life cycle
approach is followed by many ecolabelling
programmes, including the EC Flower, the Nordic
Green Swan and United States Green Seal ecolabel
award schemes.
While no explicit definition has been adopted by
either WTO or FAO, an implicitly wide definition of
ecolabelling has been used in past debates at
sessions of WTO's Committee on Trade and the
Environment (WTO/CTE) and COFI. This broader
definition encompasses product labelling that
conveys any type of environmental information.
However, as the central concerns of primary
resource-based industries include sustainable use
of the exploited natural resources and the
conservation of habitats and related ecosystems,
future ecolabelling in fisheries is likely to focus
on these aspects and not encompass all of the other
environmental impacts (e.g. energy use) that are
assessed for most of the industrial products for
which a life cycle approach is used.
Possible solutions
How ecolabelling works
Ecolabelling is a market-based economic
instrument that seeks to direct consumers'
purchasing behaviour so that they take account of
product attributes other than price. Such
attributes can relate to economic and social
objectives (fair trade; support to small-scale
fishers; discouragement of child labour) in
addition to environmental and ecological ones.
Consumers' preferences are expected to result in
price and/or market share differentials between
products with ecolabels and those that either do
not qualify for them or whose producers have not
sought to obtain them. Potential price and/or
market share differentials provide the economic
incentive for firms to seek certification of their
product(s).
The label helps consumers to distinguish a
product according to desirable attributes without
requiring them to have the detailed technical
knowledge and overview of production processes and
methods that underlie the certification criteria
and certification itself. The label is a
cost-effective way of supplying consumers with
relevant product information that may influence
their purchasing and consumption decisions.
Consumers' product choices and their willingness
to pay a higher price for an ecolabelled product
will depend on their general capacity to address,
and willingness to respond to, environmental
concerns through purchasing behaviour, and on their
level of awareness and understanding of the
specific objectives pursued through the labelling
scheme. While there is considerable evidence that
consumers' responsiveness to environmental product
attributes varies among countries as well as within
them (among different strata of the population),
there is still a scarcity of reliable data on the
gains in market shares and prices of ecolabelled
products compared with non-labelled products.
Northern European and North American consumers with
good incomes and a high level of education have a
moderate, and sometimes, strong, tendency to choose
an ecolabelled product over a non-labelled one,
even when the former costs slightly - but not much
- more. There is evidence that ecolabels covering
product attributes that relate not only to lower
environmental impacts, but also to assumed higher
product quality in terms of nutritional and/or
health benefits, can realize significant price
premiums and show strong growth in market shares,
although such products are still operating from a
small base. This applies to organic food products,
for example.
Consumer confidence and trust are essential for
a successful ecolabelling programme. If the
purchase of ecolabelled products is to be
sustained, consumers need to be confident that the
scheme's objectives are being reached. If consumers
feel misled or become confused by a large variety
of competing ecolabelling schemes within the same
product group, they are likely to return to cheaper
non-labelled products. Certification criteria that
are clear and precise and a certification procedure
that is independent and verifiable ensure that the
label conveys accurate and sufficient information.
Third-party certification through private or public
certifying agents whose qualification and
independence have been established would ensure the
reliability and accountability of the programme and
consumers' confidence in it. The international
harmonization of criteria and standards can prevent
the consumer confusion that could arise with
multiple, competing ecolabelling schemes based on
different, and perhaps deceptive, criteria and
standards. All ecolabelling schemes require a
stringent chain of custody, so that the product can
be traced throughout the full production,
distribution and marketing chain down to the retail
level. This presents particular difficulties in
marine fisheries, where fleets are often away from
port for considerable periods, may fish several
different species in one trip and may transship
and/or transform products for different markets at
sea. Although these difficulties can be overcome,
the costs associated with performing fisheries
tasks within a system that includes proper
inspection and control procedures can be a
problem.
The feasibility of achieving fisheries
management objectives through ecolabelling schemes
depends on certain requirements being met. The
economic incentive created by the labelling scheme
needs to be sufficiently high to encourage the
fishery management authority and participants in
the fishery to seek certification and cover the
related fisheries management and labelling costs.
However, the fact that many of the fisheries that
are currently biologically and/or economically
overexploited could produce high economic returns
if they were managed on sound economic and
biological principles, suggests that economic
incentives may not be the most important constraint
to realizing effective fisheries management.
Instead, political and social considerations are
likely to be important reasons why many marine
fisheries will remain poorly managed. Nevertheless,
the public relations, awareness creation and
educational activities that may accompany an
ecolabelling programme could eventually also make a
difference in the political arena, and contribute
to the kind of political will that is needed if
society and politicians are to shoulder the
short-term costs of fisheries management for the
longer-term good.
There is no guarantee that the widespread
adoption of ecolabelling programmes for marine
fisheries would result in the better management of
global fisheries in toto. At present, only a small
fraction of global fish consumers (most of them
living in Europe and North America) are likely to
be responsive to ecolabels. Most of the future
growth in global fish demand, however, will be in
Asia, Latin America and Africa. The private sector
is likely to react by directing to ecosensitive
markets only those products that can be certified
at a low cost, while other products will be
directed to markets that are not ecosensitive. It
cannot be guaranteed therefore, that when a
particular fishery fulfils the certification
criteria, excess fishing capacity will not be
redirected to other uncertified fisheries. This
could increase the pressure on some fish stocks in
favour of those for which certification is
profitably applied. Such negative spillover effects
are not unique to ecolabelling schemes and can
arise from any fisheries management approach that
does not encompass specific measures to avoid the
undesirable transfer of excess fishing
capacity.
Although some of the best managed marine
fisheries are currently found in developing
countries, in general these countries face greater
difficulties in achieving effective fisheries
management and, therefore, in participating in
ecolabelling programmes than industrialized
countries do. The reasons for this are manifold and
include the preponderance of small-scale and
artisanal fisheries, where management is more
complex because of the large number of participants
and their lack of alternative remunerative
employment opportunities; the multispecies
characteristics of tropical fisheries; a lack of
the financial resources needed to retire
significant amounts of excess fishing capacity; and
the limited technical and managerial capacities of
government agencies, many of which face reductions
in their budgetary allocations. Consequently,
technical and financial support would be needed to
facilitate the participation of developing
countries, as well as of several countries in
transition, in ecolabelling programmes.
Ecolabelling and international fish
trade
Fish and fishery products are among the most
widely traded natural resource-based goods. About
37 percent of global fisheries production enters
international trade. For many developing countries,
foreign exchange revenues from fish exports make a
major contribution to the balance of payments and
are thus of strategic macroeconomic importance. In
the three major global fish importers (Japan, the
EC and the United States), the processing,
wholesaling and retailing of imported fish are of
considerable economic significance, and they
satisfy the consumer demand that is not met by
domestic production.
The large and increasing trade of global
fisheries production and the fact that much of the
trade flow is from developing to industrialized
countries indicate the potential of ecolabelling as
both an incentive to improved fisheries management
and a barrier to trade. Currently, much of the
ecologically aware consumer demand is concentrated
in the main fish-importing countries, with the
exception of China which has become a major fish
importer only in recent years.
There is no unanimous view on how international
trade rules, including the WTO Agreements, can be
interpreted by and applied to ecolabelling schemes.
One area of divergent opinions is the extent to
which WTO rules encompass production processes and
methods that are not product-related. Another area
of concern, which is not exclusively or
specifically addressed by ecolabelling, is the
establishment procedures and characteristics of
international standards.
Action taken
In October 1998, FAO convened a Technical
Consultation on the Feasibility of Developing
Non-discriminatory Technical Guidelines for
Ecolabelling of Products from Marine Capture
Fisheries. Although this consultation did not reach
an agreement on how practical and feasible it would
be for FAO to draft technical guidelines for the
ecolabelling of marine fisheries products, it did
identify a number of principles that should be
observed by ecolabelling schemes. They should:
- be consistent with the Code of Conduct for
Responsible Fisheries;
- be voluntary and market-driven;
- be transparent;
- be non-discriminatory, by not creating
obstacles to trade and allowing for fair
competition;
- establish clear accountability for the
promoters of schemes and for the certifying
bodies, in conformity with international
standards;
- include a reliable auditing and verification
process;
- recognize the sovereign rights of states and
comply with all relevant laws and
regulations;
- ensure equivalence of standards among
countries;
- be based on the best scientific
evidence;
- be practical, viable and verifiable;
- ensure that labels communicate truthful
information;
- provide for clarity.
There are no a priori criteria that can be
considered essential or that can be applied
automatically to products derived from fisheries.
Within any labelling scheme, the criteria will
reflect a compromise between the demands of the
consumers and the capabilities and willingness of
the producers and intermediates to meet those
demands. Hence, in principle, labelling schemes in
fisheries could aim to encompass all or any subset
of the environmental, biological, social, political
or economic issues that characterize a fisheries
venture.
The set of criteria applied in any ecolabelling
scheme should be developed jointly by
representatives of the different interested
parties, including the producers, processors,
retailers and consumers. In fisheries, criteria
related to the sustainable use of the exploited
natural resources are of central concern, but
social and economic criteria might also be
considered. Criteria should be developed in a
participatory and transparent process, and those
selected should be "practical, viable and
verifiable". Practicality and verifiability are
very important requirements in assessing fisheries,
where high levels of uncertainty, arising from poor
understanding of important ecosystem principles in
aquatic systems and difficulties of measuring what
is happening in the sea, commonly prevent the
totally objective interpretation of the status of
stocks and ecosystems. This may prove to be a
substantial obstacle to the widespread application
of ecolabelling schemes in marine capture
fisheries.
The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) is an
independent, international non-profit body, created
by WWF and the large fish retailer Unilever to
promote sustainable and responsible fisheries and
fishing practices worldwide. In collaboration with
a selected group of parties that have interests and
experience in fisheries issues, MSC has established
a broad set of Principles and Criteria for
Sustainable Fisheries. Fisheries meeting these
standards will be eligible for certification by
independent certifying bodies accredited by MSC. On
a voluntary basis, fishing companies and
organizations are expected to contact certifiers in
order to have a certification procedure carried
out. Currently, two fisheries - the Thames Herring
Fishery (total annual production of about 150
tonnes) and the Western Australia Rock Lobster
Fishery (with an annual production of about
10 000 tonnes this is Australia's most
valuable single fishery, contributing approximately
20 percent to the total value of national
fisheries) - have been certified and awarded the
Fish Forever MSC ecolabel. The United States Alaska
salmon fishery is likely to be certified soon, and
initial assessments are under way for some
crustacean fisheries in Southeast Asia and Central
America and a tuna fishery in the Pacific.
The Marine Aquarium Council (MAC) is an
international non-profit organization that brings
together representatives of the aquarium industry,
hobbyists, conservation organizations, government
agencies and public aquariums. MAC aims to conserve
coral reefs by creating standards and educating and
certifying those engaged in the collection and care
of ornamental marine life, from the reef to the
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 increased
consumer demand and confidence for certified
organisms, practices and industry participants.
The Responsible Fisheries Society (RFS) of the
United States and the Global Aquaculture Alliance
(GAA), which also has its headquarters in the
United States, have announced a joint ecolabelling
scheme to recognize industry's commitment and
participation in responsible fisheries and
aquaculture. The new ecolabel will be offered to
industry members who endorse the Principles for
Responsible Fisheries of RFS or the Principles for
Responsible Aquaculture of GAA and incorporate
these principles into their business. The RFS and
GAA programmes are open to all segments of the
industry (e.g. producer, importer, distributor,
retailer or restaurant operator) and require the
preparation of reports or plans that document
implementation of the RFS/GAA principles. The RFS
programme targets all types of United States
domestic seafood products while GAA focuses
principally on farm-raised shrimp and operates on a
worldwide basis. GAA evaluates shrimp farms on the
basis of a system of self-assessment
questionnaires. RFS is considering developing a
third-party certification system.
Following an initiative by the Nordic Council of
Ministers (NCM) in August 1996, a Nordic project
group was established to review criteria for
sustainable production of fish and fish products.
The work of this group led to a number of related
initiatives by NCM and, in 1999, its Senior
Officials for Fishery Affairs created a Nordic
Technical Working Group on Ecolabelling Criteria.
The participants in this group are drawn from
Denmark, Iceland, Norway and Sweden and include
observers from the European Commission.
The Technical Working Group concluded that, in
the marine capture fisheries of the Northeast
Atlantic, state authorities ought to establish
ecolabelling criteria, which can then be used by
private bodies and NGOs to ecolabel fish products.
Ecolabelling is seen as voluntary and
consumer-driven. The Technical Working Group
emphasized that the process should be transparent,
be based on scientific findings and use verifiable
criteria. The essential elements are a fisheries
management plan, the availability of regular
scientific advice, the establishment of pre-agreed
management actions to adopt when precautionary
reference points are approached, efficient
monitoring and control systems, the absence of
destructive fishing practices, a minimum of
discards, and consideration of ecosystem issues.
The procedure should assure the consumer that
ecolabelled products derive from stocks that are
harvested in a sustainable way and that the fish
processing methods used do not have serious
ecosystem effects.
Outlook
Ecolabelling is a new concept in capture
fisheries and there is no empirical evidence as yet
about its future ability to make a significant
contribution to improving the management of the
world's aquatic resources. As has been observed in
the forestry sector, it is likely that ecolabelling
will first be applied to those fisheries that are
already fairly well managed or that could achieve
good management at a comparatively low cost. Such
fisheries are currently primarily found in
industrialized countries, but not in great numbers,
and there are important exceptions in developing
countries. For example, Namibia's fisheries and
national economy could eventually benefit greatly
if higher sale prices were realized from
ecolabelled fish and fishery products. Once the
success of pilot ecolabelling schemes has been
established, these could provoke significant
interest among governments and industry and could
create the kind of political will that is needed to
attain effective fisheries management, often in the
face of economically and socially difficult
adjustment.
The financial and technical resources needed for
these adjustments may be beyond the means of
several developing countries, and the international
community may be called on to provide assistance
and fulfil the commitments made in various
international instruments, including the Code, the
WTO Agreements and Agenda 21. However, such
assistance would be needed irrespective of whether
or not ecolabelling were considered as part of
improved fisheries management.
There is increasing acceptance on the part of
those who are familiar with ecolabelling that such
labels should not be used to discriminate against
those who cannot, in the short term, afford to
develop and implement the management practices
needed for sustainable fisheries management. It is
also realized, not least among the promoters of
ecolabelling, that it would be to the detriment of
all schemes if a large number of competing
ecolabelling schemes were to develop. This would
undermine one of the principle objectives of
ecolabelling, namely to give consumers more
information that is relevant for their product
choice. Success hinges on respecting this
principle. It therefore seems plausible that
governments, industry and consumers should promote
international collaboration in order to agree on
basic principles for the introduction and use of
ecolabels in fisheries and aquaculture.
|
