From certification to recertification the benefits and challenges of the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC): A case study using lobsters

Bellchambers, Lynda M.; Phillips, Bruce F.; Pérez‐Ramírez, Mónica

doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2015.08.029

Cited by 33 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Instead, consumers often express a preference for eco‐friendly seafood (Jaffry, Pickering, Ghulam, Whitmarsh, & Wattage, ; Wessell, Johnston, & Donath, ), but tend to be reluctant to pay more when they go shopping (Jonell, Crona, Brown, Rönnbäck, & Troell, ) or prefer locally branded products (McClenachan, Dissanayake, & Chen, ). Furthermore, price premiums that have been realized have not generally been distributed to fishers (Bellchambers, Phillips, & Pérez‐Ramírez, ; Pérez‐Ramírez, Castrejón, Gutiérrez, & Defeo, ). This makes the link between consumer behavior and economic reward for more sustainable production practices tenuous.…”

Section: Expansion Of Seafood Certificationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alternative pathways to sustainable seafood

Stoll

Bailey

Jonell

2019

CONSERVATION LETTERS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Seafood certifications are a prominent tool being used to encourage sustainability in marine fisheries worldwide. However, questions about their efficacy remain the subject of ongoing debate. A main criticism is that they are not well suited for small‐scale fisheries or those in developing nations. This represents a dilemma because a significant share of global fishing activity occurs in these sectors. To overcome this shortcoming and others, a range of “fixes” have been implemented, including reduced payment structures, development of fisheries improvement projects, and head‐start programs that prepare fisheries for certification. These adaptations have not fully solved incompatibilities, instead creating new challenges that have necessitated additional fixes. We argue that this dynamic is emblematic of a common tendency in natural resource management where particular tools and strategies are emphasized over the conservation outcomes they seek to achieve. This can lead to the creation of “hammers” in management and conservation. We use seafood certifications as an illustrative case to highlight the importance of diverse approaches to sustainability that do not require certification. Focusing on alternative models that address sustainability problems at the local level and increase fishers’ adaptive capacity, social capital, and agency through “relational” supply chains may be a useful starting point.

show abstract

Section: Expansion Of Seafood Certificationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alternative pathways to sustainable seafood

Stoll

Bailey

Jonell

2019

CONSERVATION LETTERS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The article describes multiple outcomes, however they were all assigned to the 'ecosystems and habitats' subcategory within the 'environment' category and considered as a single occurrence. Instead, an article like Bellchambers et al [4] that examines as outcomes price premiums, market access and government support, was coded assigning the outcomes to the 'economic' and 'social' (the latter outcome)categories. As such, the count of number of occurrences of outcome categories and sub-categories is the number of different articles in which this type of outcome is featured, rather than the absolute number of outcomes observed across all article.…”

Section: Data Mapping Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What do we know about the impacts of the Marine Stewardship Council seafood ecolabelling program? A systematic map

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Voluntary Sustainability Standards and ecolabels are market-based mechanisms used to encourage producers and consumers toward environmental sustainability. The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) aims to improve ocean health and promote a sustainable seafood market. There is growing interest in the program's impacts (direct and indirect) from changes to fisheries management and consumer awareness to market access and the reputation of fisheries. To better understand what is known about the program's impacts and the quality of evidence available, this map collates and describes articles on the environmental, social, institutional and economic effects of the MSC, identifying the methods used to determine impacts, and highlighting knowledge gaps and clusters. Methods: Following an a priori protocol, systematic searches of peer-reviewed literature were conducted in Web of Science, SCOPUS and AGRIS. Grey literature was gathered from Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, and three subject-specific websites. A total of 771 articles were retrieved, 271 of which were screened at full-text. 28 articles met all inclusion criteria and a further 37 met all the criteria but did not have a comparator. Additionally, 108 articles that describe the MSC but do not investigate its impacts (thus failing on 'comparator' and 'outcome' inclusion criteria) were included in the narrative report. This provides an overview of MSC topics that are of general interest to researchers in comparison to articles that investigate MSC's impact. Results: Evidence of the impact of MSC certification fall in the following topic categories: economic (38%), environmental (25%), governance (29%) and social (8%). These articles documented diverse outcomes related to MSC certification. The most common are price premiums, market access, changes in stock health, ecosystem impacts and fisheries management changes. A key knowledge gap are articles on the effects of the MSC's Chain of Custody Standard and its effects on the supply chain. Generally, literature focused on European and North American fisheries with little focus on fisheries situated in lower-income countries. Conclusions: Research interest in the MSC has grown over the last two decades, however, little research uses study designs and evidence that can robustly detect or attribute change to the MSC. Greater focus on conducting robust quasi-experimental designs would help to better understand the program effects. Comparing areas of interest in the general literature (which, for example, shows greater focus on the governance aspects of the programme than found in literature using comparators) suggests that this is partly due to lack of resources, data access and the challenge of obtaining counterfactuals. Nevertheless, some topics were absent in all areas, such as the social and economic dynamics that link harvesters and supply chain actors. It is important to fill the identified knowledge gaps as the

show abstract

“…In this context, Bellchambers et al (2016b) discuss and compare the challenges and benefits associated with the certification process in both fisheries, highlighting a similarity in the conditions imposed to address weaknesses identified in the assessment process (which were mostly related to data deficiencies). These include a better understanding of target stock status, improving monitoring and reporting of bycatch and Endangered Threatened and Protected species (ETPs), improving the understanding of the potential impacts of fishing on the ecosystem, and implementing comprehensive research plans.…”

Section: Impacts Of Fisheries Certificationmentioning

confidence: 99%