New England Aquarium: Supporting Environmentally Responsible Seafood Choices - SEAFOOD Ecolabelling: Principles and Practice - page 332

DP3 and DP4 consider impacts on other species (e.g. escapes and predator mor-
talities) and fish health (e.g. disease and fish welfare). DP5 is now being used to
gather data for new metrics (such as, the energy used in production and distribution
(Troell et al . 2004)) that are being evaluated as potential methods to further assess
seafood sustainability. All the DPs within the ADRT will be evaluated, updated and
re-ordered to respond to new information, the development of new technologies,
the emergence of new potential threats and/or the elimination of current negative
impacts.

16.5 Applying the decision-ranking tool to

business recommendations

The ultimate outcome of each fishery unit or aquaculture operation's decision path
on the decision-ranking tool graphic indicates the relative environmental responsi-
bility of that fishery or farm. Those fisheries or farms whose outcome path ends up
far to the right side of the decision-ranking tool's bottom line are utilising the best
practices overall; those whose outcome path is far to the left side need significant
improvement. And, as mentioned above, any unit that has fallen below the minimal
acceptable standard is sent further to the left and designated as 'do not buy'.
The spread of the decision outcome paths informs the recommendations to cor-
porate partners. Closely ranked units indicate they are broadly similar whereas
distantly spaced units are considerably different and may invoke a 'shift sourcing'
recommendation, meaning that the higher-ranking unit (more to the right of the
scale) should be given preference over the lower-ranking unit. In cases where the
spread between units is significant, the recommendation may be to 'source solely'
from the higher-ranking unit. When all the units under consideration fall out on the
left side of the scale, indicating that they are only minimally passing, strategies are
suggested to our corporate partners to shift sourcing away from this species to an al-
ternative species or to a unit not previously assessed which utilises better practices.
Thus, the sourcing recommendations reward those fisheries that utilise relatively
better practices and have healthier stocks. A resulting shift in corporate purchasing
habits towards these recommended units is meant to persuade the lower-ranked
units to improve their practices to gain or retain the business of corporate partners.
This decision-ranking tool system has a number of inherent benefits that make
it suitable for utilisation with major seafood buyers. First, the programme focuses
on best available practices in individual fishery and farm units. By acknowledging
that there is a range of management methods, this programme will reward fishers,
fisheries and producers that utilise better practices, while at the same time encour-
aging them to advance their operations towards practices that lead to even lower
impacts, more accurate knowledge of the species and its environment, and health-
ier, more sustainable fisheries and farms. Second, the end ranking focuses attention
on broad-scale issues and how each unit is inherently different. Only through a