Aquaculture Certification - SEAFOOD Ecolabelling: Principles and Practice - page 126

their greater yield per unit area, they make more efficient use of land, and there is
evidence that high-yield farming in developing countries is more compatible with
wildlife preservation than more extensive farming methods (Green et al. 2005).
While it is worthwhile for operators to enter the BAP programme for its own
sake, there is an obvious need for certification by a credible third-party agency to
independently confirm the conditions and actions under which aquaculture products
are made and processed. The BAP programme, and specifically the BAP logo, can
only gain credibility when compliance is verified objectively. Indeed, to harness
commercial forces effectively the BAP logo must be built into an easily recognised
ecolabel and seal of quality, so that producers and traders can gain a market advan-
tage. For most of them, interest in the BAP programme is driven by the desire to
gain recognition for supporting or applying responsible aquaculture practices.
In many other industries, such as chemicals and timber, representative trade
bodies also define environmental and ethical standards, but the job of objectively
assessing compliance with these standards is assigned to third parties. Following
this established pattern, GAA identified the need for a new body with a series of
critical characteristics:

independence from GAA, the standard-setting body;

independence from the parties seeking certification;

possession of expertise in this relatively new industry; and

the ability to function with a low cost base to broaden the appeal of the BAP
programme.

5.12 The Aquaculture Certification Council, Inc.

Having recognised the need for independent third-party certification, GAA has
been instrumental in the formation of ACC and has assigned it the exclusive rights
to certify compliance with the BAP standards. Of most importance, ACC is sepa-
rately constituted and operates independently from GAA. This separation between
the GAA standard-setting process and a certification body ensures the system is
consistent with the FAO Guidelines for Eco-Labelling of Marine Products (FAO
2005).
In 1999, GAA established a Certification Committee to consider various certifica-
tion mechanisms. GAA discussed a variety of ideas with consultants and examined
a range of models including FSC, Sustainable Forestry Initiative, SGS (Societe
Generale de Surveillance), ISO 14001, SQF (Safe Quality Food Institute), Marine
Stewardship Council, World Wildlife Fund, and some organic certification con-
cepts. None of these options was considered to be appropriate and GAA developed
a hybrid approach, combining desirable attributes from available models with mod-
erate costs. As a result, GAA established the Aquaculture Certification Council in
2003. It was incorporated as a not-for-profit corporation with the mission to 'certify