Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
As an example of a theoretical hierarchical ecological sustainability standard for
capture fisheries, a global standard may refer to bycatch issues for seabirds, while
a subset of the standard may refer specifically to long-line fisheries in the Antarctic
region, and specify the level of incidental mortality that must not be exceeded
in a fishery bycatch for each species of protected bird, or a group of birds. The
process of setting the standard for such birds would refer to existing knowledge of
the conservation status of bird populations, risks, bycatch rates, and (critically) to
consumer concerns. Such decisions might be incorporated into the standard through
reference to existing control mechanisms that may apply to longline Antarctic
fisheries. The level of bycatch may be set by the standard owner at a level considered
to be feasible and achievable through the best of the best practices in the industry, but
nonetheless protective of the bird populations. Through a grading of the standard,
a fishery that caused no incidental mortality to these birds could be awarded the
highest grading, and a fishery that killed more birds, although still within limits set
by the standard and considered to be safe for bird populations, may achieve a lower
grading.
The scope of an effective standard should also cover the nature of evidence, data
and information, and be specific about how certifiers should make decisions in the
absence of appropriate data on each specific aspect of the standard. This is important
if the standard is to operate in a cautious way to protect ocean ecosystems, and not
allow the lack of data and information to be used as an excuse to award compliance
to a standard. Effectively, the lack of reasonable data and knowledge should be used
as a basis for not awarding compliance with a standard, consistent with applying
the burden of proof of sustainability to the applicant for the label. This is discussed
further under Uncertainty and Precaution below.
If the standard is weakly expressed, is not properly focussed on the sustainability
issues that pertain to the product, does not provide a proper benchmark that is tech-
nically credible and accepted by consumers or cannot be verified through a robust
process of assessment, the standard will not be credible. Even if the system provides
good processes for judgement and quantification of performance (such as a numer-
ical scoring system using stakeholder input, statistical analysis of outcomes data,
polling of experts), if the standard is not of a high enough quality to meet technical
and consumer expectations, then the outcomes of verification of the performance of
the fishery against the standard will be open. This will lead ultimately to a limited
consumer acceptance of the product endorsement.
Product endorsements based on standards that have a limited scope, such as
covering only one part of the sustainability issues that surround a product, will fail
to influence consumers in the medium to long term. This failure may take some
time to be expressed, but standards of limited scope are not likely to be effective
or to persist in the long term. A limited-scope standard is one that, for example,
codifies a specific requirement for an outcome that is not consistent with creating
a genuine environmental improvement, or it may only deal with a limited part
of an environmental problem. Examples of such standards can be easily found in
Search WWH ::
Custom Search