Global Impacts
Report 2017
1997-2017: A 20th anniversary review ofthe Marine Stewardship Council program
and the progress and improvements madeby MSC certified fisheries around the world

Contents

Our vision is of the world’s
oceans teeming with life, andseafood supplies safeguarded
for this and future generations.

Contents

Executive summary

4

Our mission is to use ourecolabel and fishery certification
program to contribute to thehealth of the world’s oceansby recognising and rewarding
sustainable fishing practices,
influencing the choices people
make when buying seafood andworking with our partners totransform the seafood market
to a sustainable basis.

Global impacts

6

Sustainable fish stocks

20

The future of sustainable seafood

30

Foreword2

Conclusion40
References41

Cover: © Ulf BerglundThis page: © MSC/J Morgan© MSC / J Morgan

MSC, 2017. Marine Stewardship Council:
Global Impacts Report 2017.
MSC, London, UK. 44pp
ISSN 2052-8876

2Contents

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Foreword

3

Foreword© Edouard Le Bart/MSC

Reflecting on 20 years of the Marine Stewardship Council
Twenty years ago, the MSC was a bold
new idea developed by WWF andUnilever to address the global challengeof unsustainable fishing. Their aim wasto create a market-based mechanismthat would connect seafood producers
and consumers through a credible third
party, science and evidence based certification andlabelling program. This approach would both recognise
and reward existing good practice, but critically, throughthe leadership of engaged partners and stakeholders,incentivise and drive real and lasting change where
needed to ensure the health, productivity and resilienceof our global marine commons.

As we celebrate our 20th anniversary I would liketo acknowledge and give special thanks to all ofour partners – most importantly, to MSC certified
fisheries, and also to the myriad of engaged andcertified seafood businesses throughout the supply
chain, to our accredited third party certifiers andto the conservation NGO community whose
engagement in the third party process ensuresrobust and credible outcomes.

From the beginning, we recognised that the credibility
and robustness of the program would be dependent
upon our ability to capture, track, and document
evidence of improvements and impacts. A number of
early studies captured fishers’ stories and reported
anecdotal evidence of both environmental and economic
impact (MSC, 2009). Since 2011, we’ve publishedmore detailed and systematic analyses in our annual
Global Impacts Report. These reports have documented
a range of improvements from increased biomass oftarget species, to bycatch reductions, new scientificunderstanding and a range of positive economic benefits
for engaged fisheries and supply chain partners.

It has been a shared journey with many bumps in
the road but also a tremendous amount of learning,refinement and improvements to ensure that the MSC
remains fit for purpose and able to deliver our sharedvision for our oceans.

It has not been an easy journey, but twenty years on
since our foundation, WWF and Unilever’s bold idea has
become a proven concept. 12% of global marine wild
catch is certified to the MSC Fisheries Standard, themarket for certified sustainable and labelled seafood
is worth over US$5 billion and the program is widely
recognised as the most rigorous and credible indicatorof environmental sustainability and traceability in theseafood sector.

Thank you as well to our funders and to ouroutstanding governance bodies who give their time,energy and expertise to help the MSC navigate thecomplexities of the sustainable seafood world.

As we look forward to the next twenty years I haveno doubt that the MSC, through the continued
engagement and support of our partners, will be able
to make a meaningful contribution to the delivery of
the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals,
particularly in relation to SDG 14.

Rupert Howes
CEO, Marine Stewardship Council

An introduction to the MSC’s monitoring & evaluation activities
Investing in science and research has
been a key part of the MSC’s journey overthe past 20 years. Formally establishedin 2013, our monitoring and evaluation(M&E) team tracks the impacts of ourprogram and evaluates how effectively
we are delivering our mission.
Our theory of change holds that consumer desire andmarket demand encourage fisheries to achieve MSC
certification, and that the efforts of these fisheries todemonstrate sustainability results in positive on thewater change.
To test this, we capture and analyse data from MSC
certified fisheries to determine whether positive impacts
on marine ecosystems are indeed taking place. This
creates a transparent, impartial and consistent scientificfoundation to evaluate progress.
The 2017 Global Impacts Report contains systematic
analysis of the performance of MSC certified fisheries andmakes use of both fisheries scoring data (compiled by
the MSC from independent fisheries assessments) andexternal, publicly available datasets. These analyses arecomplemented by in-depth stories to bring the data alive.
By bringing these layers of evidence together, we hope toprovide a picture of the impact of the MSC program.
This year, our analysis demonstrates commitments bycertified fisheries to increasing protection for marine
habitats and funding new scientific research (page 11).
We also present evidence of improved stock status in
MSC certified fisheries globally (page 24). These findings
add to the growing body of evidence that fisheries
achieving MSC certification are delivering lasting change(see also Martin et al. 2012; Bellchambers et al. 2015;
Lallemand et al. 2016; MSC, 2016).
There are many challenges associated with demonstrating
impact in the marine environment, and we are committed
to strengthening our M&E program to better addressthese. We continue to adapt to ever-evolving scientificunderstanding and input from our stakeholders, andwelcome your feedback and collaboration as we embark
on the next exciting chapter for the MSC.

David Agnew
Science & Standards Director

4Contents

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 1: Executive Summary

Executive summary
Quick guide to the
Global Impacts Report 2017

Global reach

12% of global marine wild catch is MSC certified, afigure that has doubled since 2010.

The map on pages 16-17 highlights the positive
impacts of MSC certified fisheries around the world,from the funding of new research in the Arctic to theelimination of illegal fishing in the Southern Ocean.

Evolution of the MSC Fisheries StandardN

In a hurry? Look for the anchor andcompass icons to find short summaries of
the information presented in this reportCompass = Data analysis and results
Anchor = Deep dive stories highlighting
certified fisheries and global partnerships

On pages 8-10 we report on the substantial updates
and improvements that have been made to the MSC
Fisheries Standard over the past 20 years. Two majorrevisions (2008 and 2014) reflected evolving global
best practice in fisheries management, new scientificunderstanding and input from stakeholders.

of <1% for MSC certified products.

Improvements on the water

Improving access

94% of MSC certified fisheries have been required tomake at least one improvement to strengthen or further
monitor the sustainability of their practices, resulting in
1,238 examples of change since 2000.

The new Chain of Custody (CoC) Standard for Consumer
Facing Organisations (CFO) has seen a steady uptake
by the foodservice industry, with 135 CoC holders
representing nearly 23,000 CFO sites (page 35).
The MSC Capacity Building Toolkit and the use ofdata-limited methodologies such as the Risk Based
Framework have enabled small scale and Global Southfisheries to join the MSC program (page 30).

MSC certified fisheries have funded 46 new scientificresearch projects as part of the actions taken to ensuresustainable impacts on habitats (pages 11-13).

The MSC Global Fisheries Sustainability Fund andScholarship Research Program have enabled innovative
sustainability projects around the world (page 31).

Sustainable fish stocks

The future of sustainable seafood

On pages 24-27 we analyse stock status in ninedifferent regions of the world. Globally, stocks targetedby MSC certified fisheries show sustainable levels ofstock biomass and in many regions stocks show higher
biomass after MSC certification occurred.

Traceable supply chains

DNA testing results have shown levels of mislabelling5

Summary of fisheries engaged
with the MSC program

Our fifth Global Impacts Report reflects on the progressof the MSC over the past 20 years, examines thesustainability performance of certified fisheries aroundthe world and highlights areas of future interest.

In 2017, MSC became the first global seafoodcertification to achieve GSSI recognition.

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 1: Executive Summary

The MSC is an official indicator of progress towards
the United Nations (UN) Aichi Biodiversity Targets,and contributes to UN Sustainable Development Goals(SDGs) two, eight and 14.
The Aquaculture Stewardship Council (ASC) and the
MSC have partnered to release a sustainable SeaweedStandard in late 2017 (page 34).

Global reachIn December 2016, 296 fisheries in 35 countries are
certified as sustainable to the MSC Fisheries Standard,demonstrating their commitment to healthy ecosystems
and the long-term sustainability of fish stocks.

Suspended and withdrawn fisheries

Achieving and maintaining certification requiresconsiderable investment and dedication, and audits canresult in fisheries being suspended from the program
until performance improvements are made. In 2016, 17
fisheries were suspended.
Fisheries can also choose to withdraw from the programfor a variety of reasons, and are not required to provide
the MSC with the reason for their withdrawal. In 2016,
16 fisheries chose to withdraw from the program.

The importance of pre-assessments

A 2016 analysis of third party certifier pre-assessment
data from 1997-2014 found that approximately half offisheries that undertook a voluntary pre-assessment
did not then pursue full MSC assessment in that same
year. This suggests that many fisheries are not yet
ready to be assessed against the robust sustainability
requirements of the MSC Fisheries Standard.

Working towards sustainability

Hundreds of fisheries around the world are engaged
in Fishery Improvement Projects (FIPs). Many of these
FIPs will use the MSC’s benchmarking tools and otherresources to guide their journey towards sustainability(page 30).

100S

Number of fisheries in the MSC program as of December 31st 2016

296 Certified fisheries 17 Suspended 67 In assessment
300

200

150

100

50

0

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

2014

2016

of fisheries are
not yet ready forassessment andare engaged in
pre-assessment
activities and FIPs

6

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 1: Global impacts

Contents

7

Chapter 1: Global impacts
20 years of improvement on the water
The evolution of the MSC Standard

This year marks 20 years since the birth of the MSC
as an international and independent non-profit
organisation. Formed in the aftermath of the collapseof the Newfoundland Grand Banks cod fishery in
1992, the core output of the organisation was thescientifically based MSC Fisheries Standard, usedby third party certifiers to assess if a fishery is wellmanaged and ecologically sustainable.

© David Loftus

The first iteration of the MSC Fisheries Standard,then called the MSC Principles and Criteria, waspublished in 1999. Since then, it has been continuallydeveloped and improved to reflect the most upto-date understanding of internationally acceptedfisheries science and best practice management,
informed through consultation with stakeholders
around the globe.
When it comes to changes to the Standard, the MSC’s
policy is to reflect proven best practice, incorporating
new findings once they are generally agreed by theinternational community and implemented in multiple
jurisdictions. Read more about this journey on
pages 8-10.

Evidence for impact

The MSC program as a whole incentivises andcatalyses practical solutions and on the water change.
Use of the MSC ecolabel creates market incentives
that reward sustainable fishing practices, enabling
many fisheries to better compete in the global
marketplace. This ‘pull’ for certification, and theimproved performance from fisheries that it requires
in many cases, leads to improved stewardship of theworld’s oceans and underpins our theory of change.
In this chapter, we have captured some of the 1,200+
improvements made by MSC certified fisheries since2000 (see highlights on map page 16), and mapped
MSC engagement within large marine ecosystems
around the globe (page 14).

To complement this broader picture, we also present
in-depth analysis focusing on the practical actions taken
by fisheries worldwide to reduce their impact on habitats(page 11). Benthic impact is measured as part of thewider ecosystem assessment captured by Principle 2of the MSC Fisheries Standard, which ensures that theenvironmental impact of fishing activities is sustainable.

Systematic reporting and sharing our data

It is inherently difficult to carry out monitoring andevaluation activities in dynamic marine systems andto isolate the impacts of the MSC from other drivers.
We endeavour to be as transparent as possible in our
analysis, and have shared our data, methodology andadditional program monitoring indicators within the
supplementary materials available online atwww.msc.org/global-impacts/measuring-globalimpacts/research-and-key-documents
Together with the analyses featured in this report,these datasets are used for the systematic evaluationof the MSC program.

Be part of the change
To ensure the MSC Standards keep pacewith global best practice, we engage
with stakeholders around the world to
guide the direction of our work. Anyone
can join these public consultations via
improvements.msc.org

2016 analysis: Bycatch, discards,
and a systematic species review
The 2016 Global Impacts Reportfeatured in-depth analysis of the efforts
made by certified fisheries to reduce
bycatch and discards, enabling ‘smarter’and more selective fishing (MSC,
2016). We also conducted a systematic
analysis of the improvements made by
MSC certified fisheries, categorised by
species. You can see this analysis in the
supplemental materials:
www.msc.org/global-impacts/measuringglobal-impacts/research-and-key-documents

Contents

8

The evolution of the
MSC Fisheries Standard

It can be challenging to develop sustainability
requirements that are grounded in best available
science and management practice, applicable acrossall types of fisheries, and auditable. This challenge isfurther exacerbated by the rapid evolution of scientificunderstanding and accepted best practice management(Agnew et al. 2013).
Running parallel to our own evolution since 1997 has
been a shift in international acceptance of ecosystembased fisheries management. No longer is this seen asa simple add-on to single species stock management
approaches, but rather as an approach that affects all
fisheries management decisions (Link, 2002; Pikitch etal. 2004; Rice, 2011).

Learning and improvements: 1997-2008

The first iteration of the MSC Standard, the Principles
and Criteria for Sustainable Fishing, was developed
through international consultation with stakeholders
between 1997 and 1999. It was grounded in the best
scientific evidence, fisheries management principles,and policy agreements available at the time (e.g. United

The 2008 update also incorporated new developments
in fisheries science and management, including for
instance the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO)
Guidelines for the Ecolabelling of Fish and Fishery
Products (2005) and the International Plan of Action
for Reducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline
Fisheries (1999a).

The first MSC certified fishery© Manuel Díaz de RGB Photosocial

Since the release of the MSC Principles
and Criteria for Sustainable Fishing in1999 the MSC Fisheries Standard has
been updated regularly. The changes havebeen informed by changes in global bestpractice in fisheries management, newscientific understanding, and input fromstakeholders. Version 2.0 of the Standard,
released in 2014, strengthened therequirements for sustainable environmental
impacts of fishing, helping to ensuresustainability now and in the future.

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 1: Global impacts

Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982; FAO
Code of Conduct, 1995; Mangel et al. 1996).
Although the development of the original Principles
represented an important milestone, they were notspecific enough to allow effective auditing of fisheryperformance. Up until 2008, the MSC therefore allowed
certifiers to develop their own indicators for scoring eachfishery under assessment.
This flexible assessment approach ultimately led todissimilar interpretations of the Standard. Between
2006 and 2008 more specific indicators were developedby the MSC itself, through a multi-stakeholder
consultation process, leading to the publication of
the Fisheries Assessment Methodology and Guidanceversion 1.0 in 2008.
The release of version 1.0 (and subsequent revisions,the last being version 1.3 in 2013), saw both fisheries
and certification bodies receive a comprehensive set of
performance indicators against which the sustainabilityof fisheries globally could be evaluated.

In 2000, Western Australia rock lobster became
the first fishery to become MSC certified. The
fishery has since completed two reassessments,
implementing revisions to the Standard over thelast 17 years.

Updating stock status requirements

Before 2008, the MSC required a fishery’s target
population be maintained at high productivity whilst
avoiding overfishing.
However, it lacked specific stock reference points
that a fishery could use as a target to maintain or
improve towards, as well as clear expectations on theharvest strategy or control rules that were to be set bymanagement authorities.
The updated Fisheries Standard improved this, firmly
embedding within Principle 1 that all certified stocks
needed to have a biomass target reference point
equivalent to maximum sustainable yield (BMSY) andhave a status fluctuating around this target. In chapter 2,
we see that this is reflected in the healthy stock status of
MSC certified fisheries around the globe (page 24).

Data-limited fisheries and the Risk-Based
Framework (RBF)

The Fisheries Standard is designed to be accessible toall types of fisheries. However, its strong requirementfor quantitative data can be a barrier to some, including
small-scale and artisanal fisheries and those without
access to stock assessments (Costello et al. 2012).
To address this challenge, the MSC developed a set of
precautionary risk-based indicators for the assessment of
data-deficient fisheries – the Risk Based Framework (RBF).

9

The RBF was originally developed by Australia’s
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research
Organisation in its Ecological Risk Assessment
for Effects of Fishing. In 2008, the method waspiloted in seven fisheries around the world before
being integrated into the MSC Fisheries Standard in
July 2009.
This is one example of how the MSC has addressed thechallenge of maintaining global applicability without
sacrificing the scientific credibility of the Standard.
To date, 67 fisheries have been certified using the RBF
to evaluate fishery impacts on either target or bycatch
stocks. 24% of these fisheries were in the Global
South, including in Suriname (page 32).

An ecosystem approach to fisheries
management: 2008-2014

Between 2008 and 2014 the MSC released annual
updates to the Fisheries Standard. Many of the
updates included improvements in the way that
the Standard required ecosystem-based fisheries
management to be assessed.
For example, in 2011 the Standard was updated toreflect best practice for targeting low trophic levelspecies such as krill, which have a key role to play insome marine ecosystems. Prior to 2011, the Standard
had included the requirement that target stock
management take into account the role of the species
in the ecosystem, but was not specific about how
to do this. Over the course of three years, the MSC
undertook extensive consultation and commissioned
specific research to understand the most appropriate
management approach for key low trophic species(Smith et al. 2011). The work was combined withthe results of other international research (Pikitch
et al. 2012). In 2011 MSC released details of how
to identify whether a species was of key importanceto an ecosystem, and what management of these
species would be required to meet the MSC Standard.
In another example, responding to widespread
concern about the ability of most management
systems to monitor and control shark exploitation
if shark finning was permitted, version 1.3 of
the Standard, released in 2013, included strict
restrictions on shark finning. The new requirements
reflected international policies put in place by

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 1: Global impacts

Regional Fishery Management Organisations andguidance outlined in the International Plan of
Action for the Conservation and Management of
Sharks (1999), and their release followed extensive
consultation with stakeholders.

Working with stakeholders
All MSC Standards and certification
requirements are regularly reviewed through ourpolicy development process, and incorporate
valuable input from our stakeholders throughtargeted workshops, webinars, focus groups,
and online consultation.
For example, the newest Fisheries Standard(version 2.0), developed between 2012-14,
involved a year-long consultation with over 80
stakeholders including fishing industry experts,scientists, non-profit organisations and a wide
network of industry partners across the globe.

Further improvements: version 2.0

The most recent update to the Standard reflects thelatest fisheries science. In particular, it increases
the requirements for Principle 2 of the Standard:
Sustainable environmental impact.

Highlights include:• New requirements to review measures to 		minimise unwanted catch and implement themwhere appropriate, incorporating the principles
outlined in the International Guidelines on BycatchManagement and Reduction of Discards (2011).
• Stronger protection for habitats and vulnerable
marine ecosystems (VMEs), incorporating theprinciples outlined in the International Guidelines
for the Management of Deep-sea Fisheries in theHigh Seas (2009).
• Ensuring that the cumulative impacts of overlapping
MSC certified fisheries do not harm bycatch species
or VMEs.
In 2016, the Western Asturias octopus trap fishery ofartisanal cofradias became the first to be certified toversion 2.0 of the MSC Fisheries Standard.

International recognition
In 2017, the MSC was recognised by the Global
Sustainable Seafood Initiative (GSSI) as a credibleinternational seafood certification program.
Our certification program meets of all theessential components of the GSSI benchmark,and a further 63 supplementary components
relating to issues such as deep-sea fishing, VMEs,
and data collection to demonstrate impact.

On the horizon

The constant evolution of the MSC Standard ensuresthat all MSC certified fisheries demonstrate continued
improvements that align with evolving best practicescience and management.
However, recognising that undertaking very frequent
revisions of the Standard introduces uncertainty andincreases complexity of the assessment process, theMSC Board of Trustees has agreed that the Fisheries
Standard will next be reviewed in 2019, five years after
the release of version 2.0 in 2014.

Contents

11

How certified fisheries help
preserve marine habitats
N

Over the last 15
years, 18 MSC
certified fisheries havechanged the way theyfish to avoid vulnerable
habitats, and 35 haveundertaken new
research to fill ecologicalknowledge gaps. In thisway, certification has
contributed to global
habitat conservation.

Ocean to plate traceability
The MSC Chain of Custody (CoC) Standard isa vital link between sustainable production
and consumption, ensuring that MSC certified
products are identifiable and segregated at every
step along the supply chain.
Since the first MSC CoC certificate was issued in
February 2000, the MSC has regularly evaluated andadopted new assessment tools. For example, DNA
testing was introduced in 2009 to add another levelof scrutiny to certified supply chains and products.
Seafood fraud has received considerable attention
from the academic community, and overall DNA
testing results have shown near negligible (<1%)
levels of mislabelling for MSC certified products(MSC, 2016) compared to a global average of 30%(Pardo et al., 2016). Read more about the MSC CoC
Standard on page 35.

© iStock.com/Velvetfish

10

Aquatic habitats are the physicalenvironments where fishing takes place.
Habitats are important to consider infisheries management because they may
provide essential areas for marine animals
to breed or find food. Some habitats, suchas the structures formed by warm-water orcold-water corals (often termed ‘biogenic’habitats), are of high conservation concern
because they are highly diverse, unique,or vulnerable to fishing impacts. Others areof lesser concern, but the impact of fishingwithin them still needs to be managed
sustainably.

To achieve MSC certification, fisheries are
required to ensure their impacts on marine
habitats are sustainable; to have a strategy
in place to manage these impacts; and tohave sufficient understanding of the relevant
habitats to underpin management. These
requirements form a key part of how the MSC
Fisheries Standard helps to operationalise
the ecosystem approach to management.

New analysis

To assess the contribution of MSC certified
fisheries to global habitats conservation,
we reviewed improvements in habitats’

12

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 1: Global impacts

management made by fisheries following
MSC certification between 2000 and 2015
based on changes to their assessmentscores.
All fisheries certified as of December
2015 (185 fisheries) were analysed,
and 117 unique actions were identified,contributing to improvements in habitat
status, management and information in
39 fisheries. The majority of these were
bottom-contact fisheries (trawls, dredges,
longlines), although habitat impacts werealso addressed in some enhanced bivalve
fisheries.
The improvements were grouped into
four overarching types: Research, Impact
assessment, Technical, and Governance.
Research improvements included bothongoing data collection systems andfinite research projects. Most frequently,
fisheries produced maps of the locationand intensity of fishing or of the
distribution of vulnerable habitats, as in theGreenland coldwater prawn fishery (page18). In total, 46 new research projects werecompleted to fulfil the requirements of 30
MSC assessments.
New monitoring systems (e.g. mandatory
self-reporting) helped 12 fisheries torecord important species where they wereencountered in new locations. For example,
vessels under the Danish Fishermen’s
Producer Organisation certificate now havea shared map-based tool on board to record
encounters with corals and sponges inreal time.
Impact assessments determine thelikelihood that a fishery will cause serious
harm to a given habitat and therefore
indicate whether a change in management
is necessary. Information gathered
during certification often feeds into suchassessments.

For example, the Canada Atlantic halibut
fishery commissioned a map of its fishingfootprint. By comparing the map to existing
maps of vulnerable habitats identified
by the Canadian Government it was able
to demonstrate a negligible likelihood of
impact (2%).
Alterations in vessel procedures, area
fished, or gear specifications wereconsidered as technical changes. Eighteen
fisheries made technical changes to comply
with the MSC habitats requirements, andspatial closures were the most commonly
implemented measure (13 fisheries). In
seven cases these closures were voluntarily
adopted by industry, and the remaining six
were statutory closures implemented byfisheries management agencies.
Two fisheries implemented Governancechanges. In one case, an advisory council
was established to provide advice on
habitats’ concerns. In the other, thecountry became party to the Convention
on Biological Diversity, which conferredan additional level of legal protection onrecognised important natural areas.

Contents

13

Exploring the conservation ofmarine habitats in certified f isheries
Out of 185 MSC certif ied fisheries, 39 made at least one
improvement to habitats’ management.

10

117 improvements
47%

Researchactions

Knowledge
review/
gap analysis

27

Technical
actions

What does this mean?

While habitats are increasingly being
considered in national and international
fisheries management approaches, thelevel of information necessary to implement
management is often lacking (Heupel &Auster 2013; Kaiser et al. 2015), or isconsidered too costly to obtain (Pitcher
et al. 2016).
Many uncertainties still remain in the sciencearound habitat impacts, and the 89 newresearch and impact assessment actions
taken to comply with MSC requirements areevidence that this knowledge gap is being
filled by certified fisheries. The 36 technicaland governance actions show that MSC
certified fisheries are also improving themanagement of habitat impacts.

Encounter
protocol/move-on rule24%

Impactassessments

13
6
5

2%

Governanceactions

7

16

1 observer coverage
recovery
1 Habitat
assessmentloss
1 Gearmonitoring

Researchactions18

Map location/
intensity offishing

Implement/increase

62

Habitatmapping%

4

Mandatory
selfreporting

13

Bycatch estimates

1 Assessgear loss

1 Coastal development

3 Assess nutrient

impact assessment

635

deposition

Vessel tracking

n=35

Licencing restrictions

4

33

Technical
actionsGear
modification

1

Avoidance
procedures

Spatial closure
n=18This analysis includes improvements completed by 39 MSC certified fisheries between 2000 and 2015. Number of fisheries(n) in this case refers to number of MSC certificates. Each certificate represents a fishing company targeting one or morefish stocks and using one or more gear types. Note that many fisheries undertook multiple actions of different types.

14

Contents

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 1: Global impacts

15

Mapping sustainable fisheries

MSC certified fisheries withinlarge marine ecosystems

Proportion of large marine ecosystem (LME) catch that is MSC certified, 2006-2016

NHow certification promotes positive,on the water change
When a fishery is assessed against the MSC
Fisheries Standard, it receives a score foreach of 28 sustainability indicators.
Scores of below 60 = Fail
Scores of 60-79 = Acceptable performance
Scores of 80-99 = Global best practice
Scores of 100 = Near-perfect
If a fishery scores 60-79 for any indicator,
it must improve its performance withina specified time frame in order to retain
certification. Certified fisheries must scorean average of at least 80 for indicators
within each of the three Principles of the
MSC Standard.

Impacts on marine ecosystems

Since the first fishery was certified in
2000, 94% of MSC certified fisheries
have been required to make at least
one improvement, resulting in 1,200+
concrete examples of change. Many ofthese improvements relate to the wider
environmental impacts of a fishery.

This year, our analysis focuses on the
improvements made by fisheries tosafeguard marine habitats (page 11).

Large marine ecosystems

To explore whether the improvements
demonstrated by MSC certified fisheries
are having impact at a global scale, wehave begun to map certified catch to LMEs
across the world.
Certified fisheries are unevenly distributed
across the world’s marine ecosystems withthe highest density of certified fisheries inhigher latitude LMEs.
However, some of the LMEs with the highest
productivity and biodiversity – particularly inthe tropics and the Global South – have low
representation from MSC certified fisheries.
These regions are also vulnerable to theimpacts of climate change.
Over the next three years, we will prioritise
engagement with fisheries from some ofthese highly important LMEs.

0%

0-25%

25-50%

50-75%

75-100%2006

Proportionof LME catchthat is MSC
certified© MSC

MSC certified fisheries help to safeguard
the health of marine ecosystems byinvesting in improvements that ensure thesustainability of their practices. To explore
where these improvements are having impact at
a global scale, we have begun to map certified
catch to large marine ecosystems (LMEs) acrossthe world. The highest density of certified
fisheries is currently in higher latitude LMEs.

2011

Proportionof LME catchthat is MSC
certified

2016

Proportionof LME catchthat is MSC
certified16

Contents

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 1: Global impacts

17

20 years of impact in MSC
certified f isheries

1,238

The MSC certification program recognises, rewards, and incentivises sustainable fishingaround the globe. This map highlights just a few of the improvements that certified
fisheries have made since 1997.
West Greenland
coldwater prawn
New arctic research protects
marine habitats (page 18)

296 Certified fisheries
67
17

improvements have been
made by certified fisheries

Scottish North
Sea haddock

Fisheries inassessment
Suspendedfisheries

94%

New measures andgear for bycatch
reduction (MSC, 2016)of certified fisheries are required
to make at least one improvement
to maintain certification

Maldives pole
& line tunaWest Coastgroundfish
An American successstory of recoveringstocks (page 28)

Danish Fishermen's
Producers
Organisation (DFPO)

Canada Atlantic
halibut

Landmark
precautionary harvest
control rules (page 22)

Ben Tre handgathered clamCommunity-led management in
the 1st MSC certified fishery inSoutheast Asia (page 30)

Protecting corals and sponges
in real time (page 12)

Science in action:
mapping a fishingfootprint (page 12)

Western Australia
rock lobster
Juan Fernández
rock lobster
A risk-based
framework in artisanal
fisheries (page 30)

Long-term commitment:
the 1st MSC certified
fishery (page 8)

Suriname Atlantic
seabob shrimp
Stakeholder
collaboration in the 1st
MSC certified tropicalshrimp fishery (page 32)

South Africa
hake
Economic benefits andthe Sustainable
Development Goals
in action (page 37)

New Zealandorange roughy
An extraordinary
turn aroundorange-roughy-stories.msc.org

Patagonian
toothfish
Stamping out IUU in
the Southern Ocean(page 38)

NOTE: Each point on the map represents one MSC certificate. Certificates may cover
more than one fishery. For example, the South Africa hake certificate includes bothshallow and deeper water hake stocks, and therefore is counted as two fisheries.

18

Contents

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 1: Xxxxxxxxxxxx

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 1: Global impacts

19

Deep Dive
Mysteries ofthe seafloor

The West Greenland continental shelfextends from the equivalent latitude of the
Shetland Isles to more than 1,000 km within
the Arctic Circle. Its deep, dark seafloor
harbours a diverse array of marine creaturesfrom sea cucumbers and starfish to corals
and sponges. But the full extent of its life
has only recently been revealed.

How research collaboration
between Sustainable Fisheries
Greenland (SFG) and the
Zoological Society of London (ZSL)
uncovered new information about
Greenland’s benthic habitats.

When the Greenland cold water prawn
fishery first entered MSC assessment in thelate 2000s, the assessment team notedthat the Greenland Institute of Natural
Resources had extensive historical data on
stock assessments, yet very little was known
about the benthic habitats where the fishery
was operating. In fact many of these habitats
had never been mapped at all.

© ZSL/Institute of Zoology

The MSC assessment process
requires every fishery to provide
evidence about the health of fishstocks, habitats and other marine species
where it operates. Where there are gaps inthis information, assessment can catalyse
fruitful fishery-research collaborations
and the funding of new marine science.

To understand more about benthic
habitats in the fishing ground, SFG saw anopportunity to approach researchers at ZSLfor independent research support.

The ZSL team began mapping the seabed by lowering tetheredcameras off the side of the survey vessel used to conduct thefishery’s annual stock assessments. The cameras took highresolution images of the seabed, often hundreds of metres deep,
with each image containing up to six hundred benthic organisms.
The research, which so far has led to the publication of three newscientific papers, revealed new information about the benthic
animals living in each type of habitat, with more found in rocky
habitats and fewer in soft sediment (Yesson et al. 2017).
In response to the findings, SFG began trialling innovative
bycatch mitigation measures to minimise damage to delicate sea
pens in the vicinity of the fishery, and has worked to designatea marine protected area that will safeguard important coral andsponge species.
Although the fishery received MSC certification in 2013, its
partnership with ZSL is still going strong. Camera surveys havecontinued each year and SFG has also gone on to fund a PhD
project that will identify possible vulnerable marine ecosystems(Yesson et al. 2016). The research supported by SFG will inform
responsible fisheries management long into the future.

“As conservation scientists, it
is important for us to remain
impartial and retain control ofthe direction of our research.
Although there is a danger that
this can create conflict whenworking with industry, in thisinstance it is a genuine pleasure
to collaborate with a fishery thatclearly cares about its ecologicalimpact and respects andresponds to scientific input.”
Dr Kirsty Kemp, Institute of Zoology,
Zoological Society of London“Working with Sustainable
Fisheries Greenland has enabled
us to conduct pioneeringresearch into benthic habitats
on West Greenland’s continental
shelf, an area that would
otherwise have been very
difficult for us to access. SFG
has shown great commitment
to supporting research into
understanding the habitats inthis unique region and in using
this information to maximise thesustainability of its operations.”“Although the skippers were
initially sceptical about thework of the scientists, extensive
collaboration between the twoparties has seen that attitudechange. Now, our skippers
compete with one another toprovide the scientists withinformation about any new orinteresting findings. Along withthe certification itself, this has
been a very valuable side-benefitof the MSC assessment process.”

Dr Chris Yesson, Institute of Zoology,
Zoological Society of London

Peder Munk Pedersen, Sustainable
Fisheries Greenland© Chris Yesson/Institute of Zoology

20

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 2: Sustainable fish stocks

Contents

21

Chapter 2:
Sustainable fish stocks

Ensuring the health andproductivity of global fish stocks
Sustainable fish stocks

Chapter 1 focused on the actions MSC certified
fisheries take to ensure their broader environmental
impacts are sustainable. This chapter addresses thesustainability of the target fish stocks themselves.

formal assessments exist: the picture is worse if
estimates of unassessed stocks are included andstudies indicate that 80% of the world’s stocks areunassessed while fewer than 1% of species have stock
assessments (Rosenberg, 2017; Costello et al. 2012).

Global importance

Aiming for maximum sustainable yield

Fisheries are vital to the food security and sustainable
development of billions of people worldwide.
Hundreds of millions of people are directly or indirectly
dependent on seafood for their livelihoods, and,in 2014, fishery exports from developing countries
were valued at US$80 billion, higher than all otherfood commodities (including meat, rice and sugar)
combined (FAO, 2016).

© iStock.com/lemga

A challenging state of play

While the FAO has recorded an improvement inmany mid- and high-latitude fish stocks in the last
15 years due to improved fisheries management, theoverall status of global fish stocks remains poor, with
31.4% of fish stocks considered overfished(FAO, 2016).
Importantly, these data only include stocks for which

To establish if a fishery is sustainable, managers
generally need to know the size of the stock (biomassor B) as well as the intensity with which it is being
harvested (fishing mortality or F).
The MSC Fisheries Standard uses biomass at maximum
sustainable yield (BMSY) as a target reference point
for sustainably managed stocks. Due to the dynamic
nature of marine ecosystems, certified fisheries are
expected to maintain stock status fluctuating around or
rebuilding towards this point, and fishing mortality ator below that required for sustainable yield (FMSY).
Maintaining stocks at BMSY allows for long-term
economic benefits. Recent research indicates that if
currently mismanaged stocks were brought back tohealthy biomass, this would result in a considerable
increase in both yield and profit (Costello et al. 2017).

However, as so few of the world’s fish stocks areassessed, it can be difficult to correctly gauge BMSY.
The MSC therefore supports the use of data-limited
methods, including the MSC RBF, for assessing thestatus of these stocks. The MSC is also working on
decision-support and assessment tools for assessing
stock health against Standard requirements in datalimited situations (page 30).

Testing the credibility of MSC’s
sustainability claim

On pages 24-27 we use independent stock assessment
data to analyse the evolution of stock status in ninedifferent regions of the world since 2000.
Globally, stocks targeted by MSC certified fisheries
show sustainable levels of stock biomass, conforming
to the requirements of the MSC Fisheries Standard. This
is not always the case for non-certified stocks in thesame regions.
In many regions, MSC certified stocks show higher
biomass after certification occurred.

Resilience in a changing world

While in-depth considerations of how climate change
will affect fisheries are beyond the scope of thisreport, the ecological sustainability required for
MSC certification can help mitigate negative impacts
by improving the resilience of fisheries and marine
ecosystems in a rapidly changing world.
Across the world, fish populations are moving in
response to climate change (Cheung et al. 2009). As
species distributions shift, it will become increasingly
important for neighbouring countries and member
countries in Regional Fisheries Management
Organisations (RFMOs) to share data and agree on
management objectives for shared stocks.
The cooperative management of migratory species is an
explicit requirement in the MSC Fisheries Standard. On
page 22, we explore a landmark decision made by the
Indian Ocean Tuna Commission RMFO to adopt harvest
control rules for skipjack tuna – a precautionary measurethat will help increase the resilience of this vulnerable
region to potential climate-related stock fluctuations.

22

Contents

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 1: Xxxxxxxxxxxx

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 2: Sustainable fish stocks

23

Deep Dive

Landmark decision safeguards
the future of Indian Ocean
skipjack tuna stocks© MSC

In May 2016, the Indian Ocean
Tuna Commission (IOTC) took the
ground-breaking decision to adopt
vital harvest control rules for skipjack tuna
– against a backdrop of currently abundant
stocks. This precautionary management
strategy will help to assure the long-termsustainability of skipjack tuna stocks in the
Indian Ocean.

All MSC certified fisheries must have robust
harvest strategies, but establishing themcan be a particular challenge to fisheries
targeting highly migratory species liketuna. Tuna move thousands of miles eachyear to feed and spawn, crossing multiple
national and international jurisdictions.
Their management therefore requires
the cooperation of large numbers ofcoastal states and distant water fishingnations, operating in multinational oceanwide Regional Fisheries Management
Organisations (RFMOs).
The Maldives pole and line skipjack tuna
fishery was first certified in 2012. One of
the key conditions of its certification wasthat the IOTC should improve its harvest
strategies by adopting harvest control
rules for the fishery within the five-year
certification period, a condition that would
require the cooperation of all IOTC members.
To ensure the fishery retained its certificate,
the Maldivian Government spearheaded
efforts to establish harvest control rules,
supported by non-profit organisations theInternational Pole and Line Foundation(IPNLF), WWF and the International Seafood
Sustainability Foundation, retailers andsuppliers including Sainsbury’s, Marks& Spencer and World Wise Foods, andmembers of the EU seafood industry.
Following nearly four years of collaborative

work with scientists and IOTC member
states, a proposal was submitted for thesecond time in 2016.
Following months of detailed discussion,
the final proposal received wide support
across IOTC member states, demonstratinga collective commitment to sustainability
among the coastal and distant water fishingnations. In fact, the proposal received themost support of any IOTC conservation
measure to date, and was co-sponsoredby an unprecedented 14 out of 31 member
states. The proposal was adopted as abinding resolution during the IOTC’s 2016
annual session.
Although skipjack tuna in the Indian Ocean
is currently abundant, these agreed, well-defined harvest control rules, which were
catalysed by the MSC assessment process,are designed to ensure stocks remain ina healthy state long into the future. Given
the challenges of establishing harvest
strategies for highly migratory species,
their introduction at a time when stocks arehealthy not only represents a milestone forthe sustainable management of tuna, but
for marine conservation more broadly.
Skipjack is the most widely consumed
species of tuna, typically sold in cans.
Globally, around three million tonnesof skipjack are caught every year (FAO,
2016). Last year over 750,000 tonnes
were caught by MSC certified fisheries,
representing about a quarter of thetotal supply.

“The adoption of this harvest control measure is a ground-breaking momentin the responsible management of tuna fisheries globally. It is the first everprecautionary harvest control rule adopted by a tuna Regional Fisheries
Management Organisation while stocks are not overfished and reaffirms thesustainability credentials of the MSC certified Maldives pole and line fishery.”Martin Purves, Managing Director of IPNLF“A robust harvest strategy is a critical management step to ensure the longterm sustainability of the Indian Ocean skipjack tuna fishery. The introductionof this Harvest Control Rule was informed by a process of management
strategy evaluation that spanned nearly 4 years and demonstrates the IOTC’s
commitment to implementing fisheries management policies which are
grounded in robust evidence-based science.”
Dr. M. Shiham Adam, Director General, Marine Research Centre,
Ministry of Fisheries and Agriculture, Maldives© Nice and Serious/MSC

Safeguarding
skipjack

Harvest control rules are an important
tool in modern science-led fisheries
management. They are a set of clear, predefined guidelines that determine howmuch fishing can take place in a given
fishery, based on the size of a given stock.
In particular, they act as an insurance policy
for fisheries by defining the trigger point– a threshold stock size – at which fishingefforts must decline or cease to prevent thestock becoming overfished.

24

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 2: Sustainable fish stocks

Exploring the status of MSC
certified stocks around the world

N

An analysis of stock data from nine
regions of the world shows that
MSC certified fisheries target stocks withhealthy biomass. In nearly all regions, stocks
targeted by certified fisheries have higher
biomass in the years following certification.

fishing so the stock can rebuild. For Australia it was
the maximum economic yield (MEY) which ensures
greater economic efficiency of a fishery.

The size of a fish population (or thestock biomass) relative to a scientificallydetermined reference point is an important
indicator of the sustainability of a fishery.
The MSC Standard considers a fishery to
be sustainable if it targets stocks withbiomass fluctuating around BMSY or higher,
and harvests these stocks at a rate thatcan continue indefinitely.
If stock biomass is below its target range, afishery may still be considered sustainably
managed if fishing effort is adequately
reduced so that the target population canstart rebuilding.

Analysing stock biomass incertified and non-certified fisheries
The following analysis explores whether
MSC certified fisheries meet these criteria.
Pages 26-27 show the results of over 100
independent stock assessments publishedby fisheries management bodies aroundthe world. To be as objective as possible,
we only analysed those stocks compiled ina public database, the RAM Legacy Stock
Assessment Database (www.ramlegacy.
org; Ricard et al. 2012), and included
all those with data from 2013 or later(see supplementary materials for further
details).

Data, methodology andsupplemental materials:
www.msc.org/global-impacts/measuring-globalimpacts/research-and-key-documents© iStock.com/Aleynikov

Contents

For each region, the stock size (B) offisheries was compared to the reference
point used most commonly by local
managers (BRef ). This was maximum
sustainable yield (MSY) in most cases.
However, in Europe the reference point
was MSYBTRIGGER, used as a limit below
which managers intervene to reduce

Stocks at the MSYBTRIGGER level are likely to be at
the lowest boundary of fluctuations around BMSY,
whereas those at BMEY are likely to be substantiallyabove BMSY.
Healthy stocks are expected to have values around
B/BRef equal or greater than 1 (represented by thehorizontal dotted line on the graphs on pages 26-27).

Results

Globally, MSC certified fisheries target stocks withhealthy biomass and are being fished at sustainablerates (see supplementary materials for data on
fishing intensity).
The graphs on pages 26-27 show biomass above
the horizontal dotted line for stocks fished by MSC
certified fisheries, indicating a healthy stock status.
This is not always true for other, non-certified,stocks in the same regions, such as the West Coastof Canada, or the European countries outside theEuropean Union. This is a conservative comparison
because it only includes non-certified fisheries thatare formally assessed with reference points. Thosethat do not have full analytical assessments are more
likely to be mismanaged and show unhealthy stock
status (Costello et al. 2012; Rosenberg et al. 2017).
By comparing recent snapshots of stock health withvalues from 2000, when none of the stocks examined
were MSC certified, we can see that stocks havehigher biomass in years following certification innearly all regions.
This suggests that either a desire to obtain MSC
certification incentivised better stock stewardship, orthat the MSC label was sought as recognition of efforts
made to recover stocks to healthy levels of biomass.
One example of such efforts is the recovery of
the West Coast groundfish stocks in the USA.
Improvements in management enabled this fishery
to meet the MSC sustainability requirements andachieve certification (page 28).

25

The biomass of a handful of certified stocks does fall
below the dotted line. Where this means that the stock
is below the lower limit of acceptable values around
BMSY the MSC Standard requires the fishery to provide
evidence that the stock is rebuilding.
This is the case for certain stocks within the European
region graphs on pages 26-27, such as the Norwegianspring-spawning herring. For further information on thisstock as well as detailed analysis of the health of MSC
certified European stocks see also Chapter 2 and theappendix of the Global Impacts Report 2016(www.msc.org/2016-impacts-appendix).
In Australia, as noted above, management bodies haveadopted MEY as their target, and BMEY is higher than BMSY.
So, although for one Australian stock B/BRef is lower
than the dotted line (Blue endeavour prawn is 0.8 - i.e.
biomass is 80% of BMEY) the stock is still well above
precautionary limits and catches are less than half MSY.
For these reasons, these fisheries are still consideredsustainable and included in the MSC program.

Regions not shown in the graphs

Some regions, such as the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans,
the Antarctic, Russia, and the West Coast of the US, arehome to MSC certified fisheries but are not represented
graphically. This is either because there were notenough stocks to produce boxplots, or because
assessments in the RAM database were too outdated.
However, third party certification reports (and the official
assessments referenced therein), confirm that MSC
certified stocks in these regions, such as walleye pollock
in the Northern Sea of Okhotsk, Russia, and MSC certified
toothfish fisheries in the Antarctic, have healthy biomass
and are being fished at sustainable harvest rates.

Further improvements

Stock biomass alone doesn’t tell the full story of the
MSC’s requirements for sustainable fishing.
Where stock status is already on target, fisheries
often make other improvements to achieve andmaintain MSC certification, such as introducing newmonitoring programs or gear changes to ensure theprotection of vulnerable species and habitats (seeanalysis page 11 and analysis of South Africa capehake (Butterworth, 2016)).

Contents

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 2: Sustainable fish stocks

Status of MSC certified stocks around the world
These box and whisker plots compare the health of marine populations (stocks)
targeted by MSC certified and uncertified fisheries around the world. For each region,
recent biomass of the stock is compared to data from 2000, prior to MSC certification.

Range

Australia

2000

2015

RegionChange in stock biomass
2000

B/Bref

B/Bref0.0

B/Bref

5.0

2000

2013

European Union**

2.5

0.0

2014

South Africa

2016

n=5

B/BRef = Stock biomass compared to a reference stock biomass that ensures exploitation is managed sustainably;
Healthy stocks should lie at or above the dotted line.

2015

n=3

2000

2013

5.0

2.5

0.0

2000

2.5

US Alaska

2013

n=18

0.0

n=37

2000

2014

2.5

5.0

5.0

B/Bref

B/Bref

2000

2000

0.0

2.5

Indian Ocean

2.5

0.0

Change in stock biomass

n=12

0.0

5.0

New Zealand

New Zealand

2.5

5.0

n=3

2000

Canada West Coast

RegionAustralia
IndianOcean

SouthAfrica

5.0

0.0

n=9

B/BrefCanada East Coast2015

European
Union

5.0

5.0

2.5

CanadaWest Coast

Lower quartile
Min value in
1.5x range

Europe non EU*

EuropeNon EU

US Alaska

MedianNon MSC Stocks
Change in stock biomass

Canada East
Coast

B/BrefRegionOutlier
Max value in
1.5x range
Upper quartile

B/BrefMSC Stocks

27

B/Bref

26

n=4

2.5

0.0

n=7

Points not shown because of chart boundaries: * North East Arctic haddock (MSC certified) B/Bref is 9.6 in 2015;** Northeast Atlantic North hake (not MSC certified) B/Bref is 7.3 in 2016

Contents

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 1: Xxxxxxxxxxxx

Deep Dive
Transforming
the future of US
groundfish stocks
How the introduction of a catchshare system revolutionised
the future of the US West Coastgroundfish trawl.

© Susan Chambers

Since being declared an ‘economic
disaster’ in 2007, the turnaround of
the West Coast groundfish trawl isa true American success story. In 2014, MSC
certification recognised the improvements
made by the fishery and helped to usher infurther sustainability measures.

The West Coast of the USA is home tothe most diverse and geographicallyextensive fishery ever to enter the MSC
assessment process. The US West Coastgroundfish trawl comprises 17 different
fisheries using a variety of otter trawl
configurations, operating off the coasts ofWashington, Oregon, and California.
Historically, a total allowable catch target
was set for the entire fishery. The situationencouraged too many vessels to chase– and inevitably over-harvest dwindling
resources until the target was reached.
This in turn led to high discard rates andlow compliance with federal rules forsustainable fishing.
Between the 1980s and 2000s, landings
dropped by 70%. Fishing communities
simultaneously suffered as revenues fell
from US$47.3 million in 1997 to US$22.2
million in 2007. The fishery was declaredan ‘economic disaster’ shortly after.

A bold move for sustainability

In 2011, under the advice of the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration(NOAA), the Pacific Fishery Management
Council took the then-controversial
decision to introduce an individual fisheryquota system. The fishery-wide catch
quota was divided up between individual
fishers, allowing them to harvest theircatch when conditions were optimal, or
to lease their quota to others if they wereunable to fish, improving the stability of
their income.
To ensure the new quota system wasfollowed, 100% observer coverage wasalso introduced across all vessels. The
independent observers, trained by NOAA
to record the number, location andspecies caught, ensured that all catch(retained and discarded) was monitored
both aboard vessels and upon landing,deterring discards and encouraging
individual accountability.

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 2: Sustainable fish stocks

An American success story

The catch-share system has been atremendous success, described by NOAA
as the biggest transformation in fish
management for more than a generation(NOAA, 2013). Since its introduction,
fishers have made fewer trips each week,
landed more of the fish that they catch, andearned higher revenue for each fishing trip.
Importantly, bycatch and discards have
dropped substantially with catch of
rebuilding stocks 50% lower than before
the catch-share system was introduced. For
example, the discard rate of darkblotchedrockfish dropped from 51% to just 2% andfor bocaccio rockfish it fell from 80% to lessthan 1% (NOAA, 2015).

29

Continued improvements on
the water

In 2014, MSC certification provided
valuable recognition of this transformation
and ushered in further improvements.
Since becoming certified, the fishery client
has continued to work closely with NOAA
and has fostered strong collaborations
with international non-profit organisations
including the Environmental Defense Fundand The Nature Conservancy.
To meet conditions on stock status, it
has completed a management strategy
evaluation of its flatfish harvest control
rules and will be updating the stock
assessments for groundfish species
including arrowtooth flounder and lingcod
to ensure that catch rates are appropriate
and take a precautionary approach.

“The biggest transformationin fish management for morethan a generation.”
NOAA, 2013

© MSC/Dr Lindsay Marshall

28“The certification of this fishery demonstrates the environmental and economic
benefits that can be achieved by working together to solve major fisheries
challenges. The catch-share system has delivered benefits to both fish stocks andthe fishing community. Rates of bycatch and discards have plummeted, while
overfished species are rebuilding more rapidly than initially anticipated. At thesame time, fishing businesses are able to fish more efficiently.”
Shems Judd, Pacific Regional Director,
U.S. Oceans Program, Environmental Defense Fund

© Meredith

30

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 3: The future of sustainable seafoodContents

31

Chapter 3: The futureof sustainable seafood
Investing in the future:
The Global Fisheries
Sustainability Fund

Challenges and opportunities
A holistic approach

Delivering sustainable fisheries is challenging, andrequires the MSC to continually be aware of new
developments.
Labour abuses, for example, are of widespread concern
within the global fishing community. The MSC is therefore
strengthening its current policy to address concerns about
forced labour in fisheries and supply chains.
IUU fishing also remains an area of concern. Up to 26
million tonnes of fish may be taken illicitly each year,
and IUU fishing can threaten local biodiversity andfood security as well as cause economic damage (FAO,
2016). You can read more about IUU and the MSC’scontributions to sustainability on the high seas on
page 38.

© David Loftus

Improving access

Small-scale and Global South fisheries are vital to foodsecurity, livelihoods and economic development so it iscritical that they are managed sustainably. The MSC has
had some success working with small-scale fisheries.
The Vietnamese Ben Tre clam fishery, for example, wasthe first small-scale fishery in Southeast Asia to achieve
MSC certification in 2009, and was recertified in 2016.

However, many artisanal fisheries, particularly in
the Global South, lack the resources, data, technicalknowhow and/or governance systems necessary tomeet MSC requirements and benefit from the growing
market for sustainable seafood (Duggan and Kochen,
2016; Rosenberg et al. 2017).

Providing solutions

Accompanying fishery improvement tools havealso been developed and include Pre-assessment
Templates, Fishery Improvement Action Plans, andthe Benchmarking and Tracking Tool. Together, theseassets provide a framework for improvement and areparticularly useful for small-scale fisheries in the
Global South.

As discussed in chapter 1, the use of the RBF canenable data-limited fisheries to join the MSC program.
Examples of the successful implementation of the RBF
include the Suriname seabob fishery (page 32) andthe artisanal rock lobster fishery of the Juan
Fernández islands.

Other solutions include new criteria to evaluate thesustainability of mixed fisheries (common in areas ofhigher biodiversity and smaller-scale fisheries) and theintroduction of an In Transition to MSC Program which
will support fishery improvement projects as they makeprogress towards achieving MSC certification.

Keeping up with new developments, the MSC iscurrently collaborating with The Nature Conservancy
and the Natural Resources Defence Council to provide
even more flexible and robust decision-support
tools for assessing stock health against Standard
requirements in data-limited situations.

Beyond the Fisheries Standard

The MSC Capacity Building Program delivers
comprehensive guidance and training designed
specifically for fisheries working towards MSC
certification.

The MSC is also future-proofing its Chain of Custodyprogram by exploring new technologies for ensuring
global traceability (page 35).

Aquatic plant harvesting and farming, overwhelminglyof seaweeds, has been growing rapidly and is now
practised in about 50 countries (FAO, 2016). In 2017,
the MSC will release a new Seaweed Standard inpartnership with the ASC (page 34).

Awarded for the first time in 2016, thisfund supports innovative projects that help
small-scale and Global South fisheries toachieve sustainability and certification.
2016 winners include MDPI, an Indonesian
NGO working to improve traceability in tuna
supply chains, and Blue Ventures, who aredeveloping innovative methods of fisheries
data collection in Madagascar.
The MSC Scholarship Research Program
Now in its seventh year, the MSC scholarshipprogram supports students conducting research
into sustainable fishing and seafood supply
chains around the world.
In 2016, the winning projects were:• Investigating Mexican 			
cooperatives combating illegal fishing• Probing the socio-economic realities
of seaweed farming in Indonesia• Detangling Atlantic and Indian Ocean
tuna populations using next generation
DNA sequencing

Contents

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 1: Xxxxxxxxxxxx

Deep DiveThe power ofpartnerships
How stakeholder collaboration
empowered the first tropical shrimp
fishery to receive MSC certification.

© Nathalie Steins/MSC

In 2011, Suriname’s artisanal seabob
fishery became the first tropicalshrimp fishery in the world toachieve MSC certification. Tools such as the
MSC RBF allowed it to overcome some of thechallenges usually associated with fisheries
in the Global South. The sustainability
improvements made in this fishery wererecognised with recertification in 2017.

The small nation of Suriname lies along thenorth coast of South America. With most of
the country swathed in dense rainforest, themajority of Surinamese live along the narrowcoastal plain where fishing is essential tocommunity livelihoods.
In the mid-1990s, as an alternative to the
traditional catch of Penaeus prawn which
was then in decline, local fishers began
catching Atlantic seabob (Xiphopenaeus
kroyeri). This small, white tropical shrimp isabundant in the country’s shallow coastal
waters and across the wider Caribbean.
Suriname is now the third largest producer ofAtlantic seabob in the world.
Recognising the growing demand forsustainably sourced seafood in European
markets, the Heiploeg Group, one of thelargest shrimp processors in Europe andowner of the seabob fishery, commissioned
an MSC assessment of the seabob fisheryin 2009 as part of its Corporate Social
Responsibility program.
The initial pre-assessment revealed thatthe fishery, like many others in the Global
South, lacked the complete, long-termscientific data required to meet therequirements of the default assessment
process. In particular, it lacked a formal
stock assessment, had gaps in its datacollection practices, and did not yet havea strategy in place for managing any
interactions with Endangered, Threatened
and Protected species in the area.
It therefore became one of the first fisheries
in the world to be assessed in part using
the MSC RBF. The framework provides a
structured outline against which the risk thata data-deficient fishery is having impacts
on species, habitats and the surrounding
ecosystems can be determined. It wasdeveloped to ensure all fisheries haveequal access to the MSC program and its
associated benefits.
Using the MSC requirements as a framework

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 3: The future of sustainable seafood

to drive improvements to the fishery’s sustainability,
Heiploeg quickly recognised that collaborating withfellow fishers, scientists and the Suriname Government
would be critical to success.
The client first established a seabob working group
including representatives from its only competitor in
Suriname (Namoona/SAIL), the Suriname Government
and NGOs including WWF to discuss the fishery’s
management.
To confirm that stocks were not overfished, theSuriname Government in turn commissioned a full stock
assessment. Fishers assisted scientists in collecting
300,000 samples from catches over the course of two
years which, together with government data, allowed
sustainable catch limits and a Harvest Control Rule to be
developed to prevent over-harvesting stocks.
The fishery had already introduced turtle exclusion
devices to its nets, but to further reduce bycatch of
non-target species, it introduced two escape panels(sections of net with a larger mesh size) across the
fleet. During field trials, the panels reduced bycatch by
between 12 and 40%, benefiting populations of nontarget species, and increasing operational efficiency by
speeding up on-deck sorting.
The improvements paid off and in 2011, Suriname’s
artisanal seabob fishery became the first tropical shrimp
fishery in the world to achieve MSC certification, as well
as being the first fishery in Suriname to be managed
under a formal national management plan.

33

for a fishery to collect further information, or improve its
operations to meet best practice.
To address limitations in its initial stock assessment,
the fishery gathered seabob catch data from offshore
prawn fisheries and inshore artisanal fisheries toenter into the model. The updated stock assessment
demonstrated that seabob catch outside the fishery
was not having a negative impact on the stock and thecondition was closed.
The fishery further reduced its bycatch by refining theescape panels it had introduced, and collected detailed
catch data confirming that no vulnerable species wereregularly being caught as bycatch. It also funded a PhD
at the University of Ghent exploring the impacts of thefishery on benthic habitats.
Over the same period, the Suriname Government
reinforced its own commitments to sustainable fishingby investing US$20m in enforcement vessels tostrengthen its monitoring and surveillance programs.
The fishery was successfully recertified in 2017
after meeting all of its original conditions. Two
new conditions will prompt the fishery to refine
and evaluate its management systems to ensure it
continues to operate sustainably.
Facilitated by the MSC process, this successful
collaboration between a fishery, its partners and theSuriname government has provided a management
model for other fisheries in the region to follow.

Since becoming certified, the fishery has worked hardto meet some challenging conditions. Conditions are
generated when an assessor deems that there is scope“Thanks to the enthusiastic collaboration of fishers, government andindustry, the Suriname seabob fishery successfully overcame many
challenges on its path to certification. We hope that the improvements it
made and the benefits we are now seeing will inspire fisheries in countries
similar to Suriname to work towards MSC certification.”
Dirk-Jan Parlevliet, CEO of Heiploeg© Nice and Serious/MSC

32

Beyond fish:
The ASC-MSC Seaweed Standard
In late 2017, the MSC and the ASC will jointly
release a new certification Standard that aims tocontribute to the health of the world’s aquatic
ecosystems by rewarding and incentivisingsustainable and responsible seaweed harvesting
and farming practices.
Seaweed today

According to the FAO (2016), about 27 million tonnes of seaweeds
and other algae are farmed or harvested annually with anestimated total annual value of US$ 5.6 billion. Seaweeds areused widely in food, cosmetics and fertilisers, and are processed
to extract thickening agents or used as an additive in animal feed.
Seaweed production straddles the wild-enhanced-aquacultureboundary, and includes harvesting of natural seaweed beds,
farming of planted and suspended seaweeds and land-based
aquaculture where seaweed is grown.

Contents

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 3: The future of sustainable seafood

Fighting seafood fraud:science and technology for traceable seafood supply chains
Seafood fraud – the deliberate sellingof seafood products with a misleadinglabel, description or promise – threatens
environmental and economic sustainability
and can allow IUU fishing to go undetected.
A traceable supply chain is vital todelivering the MSC’s vision of healthy
oceans and its promise to consumers
that MSC labelled seafood comes froma sustainable source. For example, thetraceability assured by the MSC CoC
Standard has recently helped to restore
consumer confidence in the sustainabilityof Patagonian and Antarctic toothfish
products (page 38).

Positive growth

Globally, seaweeds play a key role in aquatic ecosystems
and coastal protection, and are a valuable resource for local
communities. They also provide a foundation for many marine foodwebs and form important habitats for associated marine flora andfauna. Over exploitation of seaweed may have detrimental effects
on biodiversity and water quality and can increase coastal erosion(FAO, 1990).

Newer versions of the Chain of CustodyStandard – such as the Standard forConsumer Facing Organisations (CFO) thatwas implemented in 2015 – have allowed
the foodservice industry to become MSC
certified, and there are now 135 CoC
holders representing nearly 23,000 CFO
sites, including fishmongers, hotels, andrestaurant chains. There has also beena notable increase in the number of CoC
certificates in Asia-Pacific, suggesting
an upsurge in interest in areas outside
traditional European markets.

A new Standard

Our latest DNA testing results

Aquatic health and livelihoods

As global seaweed production increases, so does demand for
certification of the seaweed industry. The ASC-MSC SeaweedStandard reflects international guidelines, sector best practices
across different regions, and the latest scientific advice. It wasdeveloped through extensive online public consultations andtargeted stakeholder workshops beginning in February 2016.

35

Most seafood in MSC certified supply
chains will travel through multiple
countries and continents between harvestand consumption. Maintaining the highest
level of traceability and assurance for
new and complex fisheries, products andsupply chains requires MSC to continuallydevelop its systems for data collection
and management, product labelling andtracking, and science-based verification.
For example, a 2016 study commissioned© iStock/nicolas

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 1: Xxxxxxxxxxxx© iStock/kerriekerr

34

by the MSC tested the DNA of fish sold in
UK fish and chip shops. The study revealed
fish mislabelling at a rate of just 1.64% in
shops with an MSC certificate, comparedto over 8% in non-certified shops. The DNA
tests were conducted by SASA laboratory
on samples of battered fish from 122
shops in the UK and Ireland, half of whichwere MSC certified.

Looking to the future

In addition to ongoing DNA testing andother tools, the MSC is exploring the use of
new technologies and scientific advances
to improve the effectiveness of MSC supply
chain audits.
Recent technological developments
include remote surveillance tools,
electronic audit checklists and digital
traceability tools that facilitate instant
document tracebacks. The latest advances
in molecular and geochemical science,such as rapid DNA test panels and traceelement fingerprinting, may also help toverify the species and geographic origin of
MSC certified products in future.

36

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 1: Xxxxxxxxxxxx

Global partnerships for biodiversity
and sustainable development

Contents

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 3: The future of sustainable seafood“The global indicator produced through the MSC’s monitoring andevaluation is a valuable tool for understanding progress towards
sustainable fisheries, and thus global commitments relating tobiodiversity and sustainable development. The certification program
helps to demonstrate commitment to and inform the decisions of fishers,
seafood companies, governments and consumers for healthy oceans.”
UN Environment World Conservation Monitoring Centre, hosts to the secretariatof the Biodiversity Indicators Partnership

The MSC and the Sustainable
Development Goals
In 2015, countries adopted a set of 17
goals to end poverty, protect the planet,and ensure prosperity for all as part of a
new sustainable development agenda.

The MSC and the United
Nations Convention on
Biological Diversity
In 2010, the international community set
20 targets under the UN’s Convention
on Biological Diversity. These ‘Aichi
Targets’ map global progress towards
the Convention’s 2020 goals to conserve
biodiversity around the world.
Teaming up with the UN Environment
Programme as an official biodiversity
indicator partner, the MSC supplies datato help assess progress towards Aichi
Targets six and four.
Total MSC certified catch is compared to
global wild catch, as reported by the FAO,
to track ecological sustainability in global
fisheries.
© iStock.com/lemga

Aichi Target six: reduce directpressures on biodiversity andpromote sustainable use
By 2020 all fish and invertebrate stocks
and aquatic plants are managed andharvested sustainably, legally and applying
ecosystem-based approaches.
MSC certified catch is a primary indicator forthis target.

Aichi Target four: mainstream
biodiversity acrossgovernment and society
By 2020 governments, business andstakeholders at all levels have taken steps
to achieve or have implemented plans forsustainable production and consumption.
MSC certified catch is a secondary indicator
for this target.

The MSC and other credible standard
setters have a key role to play in helping
companies and governments to achieve
the SDGs, for example by providing bestpractice guidance for ‘what good looks like’
in a specific industry (WWF/ISEAL, 2017).

Our oceans

By incentivising best practicein the fishing industry, theMSC contributes to a number of SDG 14
targets including ending overfishing,implementing ecosystem management,
and eliminating IUU fishing. Read more
about the MSC and IUU fishing in theSouthern Ocean on page 38.
The MSC has joined with countries,
non-profit organisations, and scientists

from around the world to plan theimplementation of SDG 14, participatingin events including the 2017 UN Ocean
Conference.

Food security andeconomic productivity

MSC certified fisheries also
contribute to sustainable
development targets on foodsecurity and sustainableeconomic growth.
Maintaining or rebuilding fish stocks tosustainable levels is essential to ensure
the long-term availability of food (Kelleher
et al. 2009). Many fisheries have also
experienced economic benefits, including
access to preferred markets and pricepremiums, as a result of MSC certification.
Among these is the South African hake
trawl, where a recent analysis concluded
that losing MSC certification would
result in a 37.6% loss of value over five
years, and put 5,000-12,000 jobs at risk
(Lallemand et al, 2016).

UNEP-WCMCThe United Nations Environment Programme’s World Conservation
Monitoring Centre
Find out more: www.bipindicators.net/indicators/msc-certified-catch37

Contents

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 1: Xxxxxxxxxxxx

Deep DiveA sustainable
future for Southern
Ocean fisheries
How MSC certification has helped
restore consumer confidence inPatagonian and Antarctic toothfish© COLTO/SAPMERPatagonian toothfish live in the cold
waters of the southern Atlantic,
Indian, and Pacific Oceans, a vast
area spanning the territorial seas of multiple
countries, as well as high seas regions.
Antarctic toothfish reside even further
south, closer to the Antarctic continent.

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Chapter 3: The future of sustainable seafood

Both are commercially and ecologicallyimportant species, and around SouthAmerica the fisheries for Patagonian
toothfish are also vital for local
communities.

In all, the sustainable management of seven
toothfish fisheries has now been recognised with
MSC certification. In addition to incentivisingcountermeasures to IUU fishing, this process has
triggered further improvements. For example:

Despite the complexities of managing suchwide-ranging fish stocks, and historicalissues with IUU fishing, the toothfish
industry has been charting a sustainable
course over the past 20 years, overcoming
its once-damaged reputation among
consumers.

• In 2004 the South Georgia Patagonian 		
toothfish longline became the first such fishery toachieve MSC certification. South Georgia and theSouth Sandwich Islands have since introduced anumber of mechanisms to combat IUU fishing,implemented improvements to bycatch 		management and created a large marine protected
area. The South Georgia toothfish fishery wasrecertified in 2009 and again in 2014, each timewith no conditions.

In the late 1990s and early 2000s, the illicit
fishing of toothfish was threatening thesustainability of stocks, undermining the
livelihoods of fishing operators, and having
a detrimental impact on other marine
wildlife, including some albatross species.
This negative spiral led not only to the lossof 32,000 tonnes of fish in a single year atits peak, but also prompted widespread
mistrust among consumers. Because they
couldn’t confidently tell if the toothfish they
were buying had been caught legitimately,
consumers bought fewer toothfish, andprices plummeted.
Over the past 20 years, thanks to a
combined effort involving industry
members, international non-profit
organisations, and national governments,
who joined forces with the Commission
for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine
Living Resources, IUU has been virtuallyeliminated in the Southern Ocean, bird
bycatch has been dramatically reduced(see MSC Global Impacts Report, 2016),
and the impacted toothfish stocks havesignificantly recovered.
In 2015, Austral Fisheries – a member of
the Coalition of Legal Toothfish Operators
and an MSC certified fishery – even joinedin the pursuit of one of the last-known
pirate vessels, the notorious FV Thunder.

• Australia’s Heard Island and McDonald 		Islands Patagonian toothfish fishery was certified
as sustainable in 2012. An AU$1.2 million joint
research project and data-sharing agreement
between French and Australian scientists 		
improved the understanding of toothfish stock
status across the Kerguelen Plateau (an area of
sea comprising both country’s fishing 		39

zones) enabling this fishery and the MSC certified
Kerguelen Island toothfish fishery to close 		conditions on stock status.
• The Kerguelen Island fishery, home to globallysignificant breeding populations of grey petrels,
has also implemented a number of measures toreduce interactions with seabirds. Before 2005at least 750 petrels were killed each year, but in2014-15 that number had dropped to just three.
Read the full story – Beating Bird Bycatch – in the2016 Global Impacts Report (MSC, 2016,
pages 34-35).
Aside from improvements on the water, the MSC
Chain of Custody Standard has also played an
important role in ensuring toothfish supply chainsare free of illegally caught fish. By implementing
automated, secure at-sea labelling, maintaining
the necessary records and supply chain monitoring
systems, and understanding the volume of legallycaught products, the Standard effectively segregates
MSC toothfish from those caught illegally. This isbolstered by ongoing DNA testing to confirm that
toothfish products are correctly labelled.

“The MSC certification process marks a step-change in the way thatfisheries are managed and in how they are perceived by consumers.
South Georgia is proud to lead by example. By working with the fishingindustry and other stakeholders there is a shared sense of responsibility
for demonstrating the highest levels of sustainability.”
James Jansen, Government of South Georgia & the South Sandwich Islands“The MSC process has driven real improvements in the managementof toothfish in the Southern Ocean. Certification has not only helped
us to reach new consumers with our product, it has facilitated terrificconversations with policymakers, commercial partners and stakeholder
groups, ensuring a positive future for our fisheries.”
David Carter, Austral Fisheries© iStock/HadelProductions

38

40

Contents

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | Conclusion

MSC Global Impacts Report 2017 | References

41

References

The landscape of the sustainable seafood movement in2017 is at once challenging and immensely exciting.

As reflected in SDG 14, there is an increased focus on
the contribution of fisheries towards food security,
nutrition, and sustainable economic growth.
The MSC program remains a catalyst for change inthis context. By working both with fisheries to reward
and incentivise change on the water, and with retailers
and consumers to ensure a market for environmentally
sustainable seafood, we are uniquely positioned to linkocean health with people’s lives and plates.
This report has outlined the history of the MSC Fisheries
Standard, focusing on its continual evolution in linewith stakeholder input and global best practice. It
has showcased evidence of improvements to thesustainability of MSC certified fisheries over the past 20
years, both in terms of stock levels around the world

and in the work done to protect vulnerable ecosystems
and marine habitats.
Looking to the future, we are committed tostrengthening our work with small-scale and artisanal
fisheries in the Global South and in LMEs of key
biodiversity importance, focusing our efforts where
impact is most needed.
Overwhelmingly, the message of this report is oneof transformation and positive change. A little over
20 years ago, the MSC was just a brilliant idea. Overthe years we have proven that certification can be aneffective tool for seafood sustainability, and we lookforward to working with our many partners to ensurethat the benefits of sustainable fishing are brought tomore communities in future.

© Karolina Pihlo

Conclusion

Agnew, D.J., Gutiérrez, N.L., Stern-Pirlot, A., Hoggarth, D.D., (2013) The MSC
experience: developing an operational certification standard and a market
incentive to improve fishery sustainability. ICES J Mar Sci. 71(2), 216-225.
Bellchambers, L. M., Fisher, E. A., Harry, A. V., Travaille, K. L. (2015) Identifying
and mitigating potential risks for Marine Stewardship Council assessment
and certification. Fisheries Research. 182 7-17
Bellchambers, L. M., Phillips, B. F., Pérez-Ramírez, M. (2015) From certification
to recertification the benefits and challenges of the Marine StewardshipCouncil (MSC): A case study using lobsters. Fisheries Research.
Butterworth, D.S. (2016) The South African experience with MSC certification: A
perspective. Fisheries Research. 182, 124–127.
Costello, C., Ovando, D., Clavelle, T., Strauss, C.K., Hilborn, R., Melnychuk, M.C.,
Branch, T.A., Gaines, S.D., Szuwalski, C.S., Cabral, R.B., Rader, D.N., Leland,
A. (2016) Global fishery prospects under contrasting management regimes.
PNAS 113 (18) 5125–5129.
Costello, C., Ovando, D., Hilborn R., Gaines, S.D., Deschenes, O., Lester, S.E.
(2012) Status and Solutions for the World’s Unassessed Fisheries. Science.
338(6106), 517–520.
Cheung, W.W.L, Lam, V.W.L., Sarmiento, J.L., Kearney, K., Watson, R. Pauly, D.
(2009) Projecting global marine biodiversity impacts under climate change
scenarios. Fish and Fisheries. 10 (3) 235–251
Duggan, D. and Kochen, M. (2016) Small in scale but big in potential:
Opportunities and challenges for fisheries certification of Indonesian smallscale tuna fisheries. Marine Policy. 67, 30–39.
FAO (2016) The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture. Available at: http://
www.fao.org/3/a-i5555e.pdf
FAO (1990): Environmental aspects of seaweed culture, M. J. Phillips in:Technical resource papers regional workshop on the culture and utilizationof seaweeds Volume II.
Heupel, E. and Auster, P. (2013) Eco-labeling seafood: Addressing impacts tovulnerable seafloor species, communities, habitats and ecosystems in datapoor regions. Marine Policy. 38, 8–15
Kaiser, M., Hilborn, R., Jennings, S., et al. (2015) Prioritization of knowledgeneeds to achieve best practices for bottom trawling in relation to seabed
habitats. Fish and Fisheries. 17, 637–663.
Kelleher, K., Arnason, R., Willman, R. (2009) World Bank Sunken Billions: The
Economic Justification for Fisheries Reform.
Lallemand, P., Bergh, M., Hansen, M., Purves, M. (2016). Estimating the
economic benefits of MSC certification for the South African hake trawl
fishery. Fisheries Research. 182, 7–17.
Link, J. S. (2002) What does ecosystem-based fisheries management mean?
Fisheries. 27(4), 18–21.
Martin, S. M., Cambridge, T. A., Grieve, C., Nimmo, F. M., Agnew, D.J. (2012)
An Evaluation of Environmental Changes Within Fisheries Involved in the
Marine Stewardship Council Certification Scheme. Reviews in Fisheries
Science. 2 61-69

Mangel, M., Talbot L.M., Meffe G.K., et al. (1996) Principles for the conservationof wild living resources. Ecological Applications. 6, 338-362.
Marine Stewardship Council (MSC). (2016) Global Impacts Report 2016. MSC,
London, UK.
Marine Stewardship Council (MSC). (2015) From ocean to plate: How DNA
testing helps to ensure traceable, sustainable seafood.
Marine Stewardship Council (MSC). (2009) Net Benefits Report.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). (2015) Update for
the West Coast Catch Shares Program. Available at: https://www.nwfsc.
noaa.gov/news/documents/CatchSharesUpdate2015.pdf
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2013 Update for
the West Coast Catch Shares Program. Available at: http://www.westcoast.
fisheries.noaa.gov/stories/2013/23_west_coast_fleet_gains_confidence_
under_catch_shares.html
Pardo, M.A., Jimenez, E. & Perez-Villarreal, B. (2016) Misdescription incidents
in seafood sector. Food Control. 62, 277-283.
Pikitch, E. K., Santora, C., Babcock, E.A., et al. (2004) Ecosystem-based fishery
management. Science. 305(5682), 346–347.
Pikitch, E., Boersma, P.D., Boyd, I.L., et al. (2012) Little Fish, Big Impact:
Managing a Crucial Link in Ocean Food Webs. Lenfest Ocean Program.
Washington, DC. 108 pp.
Pitcher, R., Ellis, N., Jennings, S., et al. (2016) Estimating the sustainabilityof towed fishing-gear impacts on seabed habitats: a simple quantitativerisk assessment method applicable to data-limited fisheries. Methods in
Ecology and Evolution. 8, 472–480.
Ricard, D., Minto, C., Jensen, O.P., Baum, J.K. (2012). Examining the knowledge
base and status of commercially exploited marine species with the RAM
Legacy Stock Assessment Database. Fish and Fisheries, 13, 380–398.
Rice, J. (2011) Managing fisheries well: delivering the promises of an
ecosystem approach. Fish and Fisheries. 12, 209–231.
Rosenberg, A. A., Kleisner, K. M., Afflerbach, J. et al. (2017), Applying a New
Ensemble Approach to Estimating Stock Status of Marine Fisheries Around
the World. Conservation Letters. 2 (49)Smith, A.D.M., Brown, C.J., Bulman, C.M., et al. (2011) Impacts of fishing
low-trophic level species on marine ecosystems. Science 333 (6046),
1147–1150.
WWF/ISEAL. (2017) SDGs Mean Business: How Credible Standards Can HelpCompanies Deliver The 2030 Agenda.
Yesson, C., Simon, P., Chemshirova, I., Gorham, T., Turner, C. J., Hammeken
Arboe, N., Blicher, M. E., Kemp, K. M. (2015) Community composition of
epibenthic megafauna on the West Greenland Shelf. Polar Biology. 38,
2085–2096.
Yesson, C., Fisher, J., Gorham, T., Turner, C. J., Hammeken Arboe, N., Blicher, M.
E., Kemp, K. M. (2017) The impact of trawling on the epibenthic megafaunaof the West Greenland shelf. ICES Journal of Marine Science. 74 (3),866–876.

Acknowledgements
Editor-in-chief: David Agnew
Lead authors: Catherine Longo, Lucy Anderson, Lucy Erickson
Technical contributors: Taylor Gorham (lead), Robert Lefebure (lead),
Jaco Barendse, Jean-Charles Gordon, Marcus Nelson, Peter Hair
Data visualisation: Steve Rocliffe
Design: Be Curious
With special thanks to:
MSC: Rupert Howes, Sarah Bladen, Beth Askham, Bill Holden, Dan
Averill, Dan Hoggarth, Gisli Gislason, Hannah Norbury, Jay Lugar, Jim
Humphreys, Joanna Jones, Jo Miller, Kari Stange, Leslie Brazeau, Matt
Watson, Mike Platt, Oluyemisi Oloruntuyi, Rodrigo Polanco, Rohan
Currey, Sarah Lahert, Shen Yan Liow, Sophie Ferber, Stephanie Good,
Suzi Keshavarz, Titia Sjenitzer, Victor Simoncelli
Aquaculture Stewardship Council

Austral Fisheries
Environmental Defense Fund
Heiploeg Group
Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London
International Pole and Line Foundation
Michael Melnychuk
Ministry of Fisheries and Agriculture, Maldives
Sustainable Fisheries Greenland
Tristan Southall
UN Environment World Conservation Monitoring Centre
Government of South Georgia & the South Sandwich Islands
Suggested citation
MSC, 2017. Marine Stewardship Council: Global Impacts Report 2017.
MSC, London, UK. 44pp ISSN 2052-8876

Contents

MSC Global Headquarters
and Regional Office – Europe,
Middle East and Africa
Marine House
1 Snow Hill,
London EC1A 2DH
info@msc.org
Tel: + 44 (0) 20 7246 8900
Fax + 44 (0) 20 7246 8901
Registered Charity number: 1066806
Registered Company number: 3322023

MSC Regional Office – Americas
1255 23rd Street NW
Suite 275
Washington, DC 20037
USA
americasinfo@msc.org
Tel: +1 202 793 3284

MSC Regional Office – Asia Pacific
6/202 Nicholson Parade,
Cronulla
NSW 2230
Australia
apinfo@msc.org
Tel: +61 (0)2 9527 6883

Non profit status: 501 (C) (3)Employer Identification number:
91-2018427

Non profit status: Registered with ACNC
Registered Company number:
ABN: 69 517 984 605,
ACN: 102 397 839

MadridSpain, Portugal
Milan
Italy
Paris
FranceReykjavik
IcelandSantiago
Chile

SeattleUSA
Singapore
South East Asia and Hong Kong
Stockholm
Scandinavia and Baltic Sea
Tokyo
Japan
TorontoCanadaArea Offices:
Beijing
China
BerlinGermany, Switzerland,
Austria
Cape Town
Southern Africa
Copenhagen
Denmark
The Hague
Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg
The MSC also has a presence in:
Antwerp – Belgium
Busan – South Korea
Cancún – Mexico
Helsinki – FinlandMontevideo - Uruguay
Moscow - Russia
Warsaw - Poland

Find out more:
Printed using vegetable oil based inks on Cocoon Silk FSC® certified
paper, which is made from post-consumer waste and fibre fromwell-managed, responsible, FSC® certified forests. MSC uses a carbon
neutral print company who recycle over 95% of press chemicals andwaste associated with production.

All data in this report are correct as of 31 December 2016.
All images are copyright of the MSC unless otherwise stated.

msc.org/global-impacts
info@msc.org@MSCecolabel/MSCecolabel/marine-stewardship-council© Marine Stewardship Council 2017