Seafood eco-labels are not adequate indicators of sustainable seafood choices for consumers, restaurants or retailers, a Washington, D.C., environmental advocacy group declared on Tuesday.
Food & Water Watch (F&WW) criticized leading seafood eco-labels such as the Marine Stewardship Council, Global Aquaculture Alliance and Friend of the Sea with its guide, “De-Coding Seafood Eco-Labels: Why We Need Public Standards.” Eco-labels inadequately regard environmental standards, social responsibility and community relations, labor regulations, international law and transparency, F&WW said.
“People often think that if they buy seafood with an eco-label, it’s automatically a good choice,” said F&WW Executive Director Wenonah Hauter. “Unfortunately, these certifications don’t assure that the product consumers are getting is actually eco-friendly.”
F&WW’s report indicates that “flawed” fisheries are often certified and that few improvements are made after a fishery attains certification. Conversely, many sustainable fisheries cannot afford certification, which F&WW says is mostly used for marketing purposes. What’s more, eco-labels don’t take carbon footprints into consideration, nor do they meet U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization standards for transparency, damage mitigation from pollution and contribution to rural development and food security.
“Consumers aren’t told that these labels often have a ‘pay to play’ aspect,” said Marianne Cufone, director of F&WW’s fish program. “A well-managed fishery that can’t finance certification may not have an eco-label, while one that is less sustainable could be certified because someone paid for it. As a result of this, labels can actually encourage consumers to buy less sustainable products, and it can be challenging for consumers to decipher whether labels are very meaningful.”
The report concludes that the U.S. government must step up and offer consumers more meaningful ways to judge whether the seafood they buy is environmentally and socially responsible.
