Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
In the pollock assessment, with agreement from APA, the certifier engaged NGO
stakeholders early in the process in an effort to be transparent and open as well as
to help identify early in the process any areas of stakeholder concern. These well-
intentioned efforts did not produce the hoped-for results. Despite exceptional efforts
by the certification body to accommodate stakeholder concerns, NGO stakeholders
did not accept the final certification determination, including the extensive 'condi-
tions' attached to the certification. Conditions are certifier-imposed requirements
for supplementary actions pertaining to certain PIs that, when successfully com-
pleted, mean that the fishery is achieving a level of performance that is consistent
with a score of 80 for the relevant PIs.
Stakeholder consultation was not the only factor in this overly long assessment
process. A significant part of the delay was due to the workload of the certifier as the
number of fisheries entering the programme outstripped the capacity of certification
bodies. There were three MSC-accredited certifiers when the Alaska pollock fishery
entered assessment in January 2001 but by mid-2007, there were still only four fully
accredited certifiers. In that time, the MSC programme has grown from a handful of
participating fisheries to the point where the programme has 22 certified fisheries
(each requiring an annual audit and 5-year reassessment by a certification body) and
18 fisheries undergoing assessment. Pre-assessments are confidential, so it is not
known how many additional fisheries are considering a full assessment in the MSC
programme in the near future. It is puzzling that more businesses with fisheries
expertise or certification experience have not sought MSC accreditation.
The lack of certification bodies available to perform fishery assessments stands
in sharp contrast to the tremendous success that the MSC has enjoyed in recruit-
ing a strong class of retailers, food service providers and brand name seafood
processors to support the programme, including Whole Foods Markets, Migros,
Wal-Mart, Metro Group, Findus, Young's and Iglo/Birdseye (MSC Annual Report
2005/2006). At the urging of US Alaska and West Coast fisheries, the MSC ini-
tiated a programme in late 2006 to reach out to potential certification bodies that
may be interested in becoming accredited to assess fisheries to the MSC standard.
The success of this effort - and the ability of new certification bodies to provide
assessments consistent with experienced certification bodies - will be an important
determinant in controlling the cost of assessments for fisheries through competi-
tive bidding among certifiers and providing for the timely completion of fishery
assessments.
13.5.2 Subjectivity in scoring
One of the most daunting aspects of submitting to an MSC assessment is that if
a fishery fails to achieve a score of at least 60 on any single PI, then the fishery
fails outright and cannot be certified by the MSC. As mentioned above, if a fishery
does not achieve a score of at least 80 on any single PI, the certifier must impose
a condition that, when met, will result in the fishery achieving a performance level
Search WWH ::




Custom Search