Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
supply chain. MSC estimates of the cost range between US$1000 and 5000. Off-
product use of the logo is granted under a licence agreement with MSC's trading
company, MSCI. The fee for on-product use of the logo is US$2000 for companies
under a US$1 million annual turnover, otherwise 0.1% value of sales (source:
interviews with MSC officers and South African hake operators; Ponte 2006).
The overall cost of obtaining certification depends on the nature of the problems
uncovered in the assessment and the corrective actions that have to be undertaken.
Most MSC products are processed seafood preparations. Retailers are generally
able to push certification-related costs upstream to processors. The last article on
MSC that appeared in SAMUDRA Report (July 2004, in response to an article by
MSC in the March 2004 issue) highlights that financial arrangements for certifica-
tion are left to private negotiation between clients and certification agencies, and
calls for MSC to channel such negotiations, which would allow discounts and 'soft'
payment options for selected fisheries. Another problem with certification costs is
that only four certifiers are currently accredited to carry out fishery certification (and
one of those has only assessed a single fishery), providing a small base for compet-
itive pricing. Three more agencies are accredited for chain-of-custody certification
only; six agencies are undergoing accreditation for fishery and/or chain-of-custody
accreditation.
MSC has finally recognised that its standard and certification procedures are not
geared towards the realities of developing country fisheries, especially small-scale
and data-deficient ones. A special programme (MSC Developing World Fisheries
Programme) is seeking to improve the awareness of MSC in developing countries
and to develop guidelines for the assessment of these fisheries. The project aims to
develop guidance for certifiers on the use of 'unorthodox' information on fisheries,
such as traditional ecological knowledge and management systems. It also aims to
use a 'risk-based' approach to qualitatively evaluate fisheries. However, the aim
is developing 'operational interpretations' to assess small-scale and data-deficient
fisheries, rather than writing a separate standard (MSC 2004c). It is too early to
assess the likely impact of such a programme. However, funding will not be available
to developing country fisheries directly from MSC - MSC refers interested parties
to the Sustainable Fisheries Fund (administered by the Resources Legacy Fund),
the WWF Community Fisheries Grants and the Sea Change Investment Fund.
Failure to certify developing country, small-scale fisheries in the short-to-medium
term would seriously dent the legitimacy of the MSC programme. Outreach work-
shops in developing countries are obviously important, but without large funding to
support research and institutional improvements, the current MSC standard will not
be achievable by a large majority of fisheries in developing countries, and especially
in least developed countries.
A stimulus for revising the MSC system in a way that is friendlier towards de-
veloping countries has been provided (in March 2005) by the FAO Committee of
Fisheries adoption of voluntary guidelines for ecolabelling of fish products (FAO
Search WWH ::
Custom Search