Anecdotes and Lessons of a Decade - SEAFOOD Ecolabelling: Principles and Practice - page 422

are considering developing their own national certification and ecolabel systems
(DiPietro 2007).
These government-backed certification and ecolabelling systems (including the
Australian government's certification system, Chapter 1) are most closely akin to
self-assessment systems. However, they may be effective for driving some envi-
ronmental change in the medium term purely because they express a government
policy position in an operational context for all fisheries under their jurisdiction,
and this in itself may act as an agent for change. We understand that the Australian
government's certification system may be upgraded in 2008 to an ecolabel.

21.4 Quality of the standard

In certification and ecolabelling systems, standards need to be clear and explicit, and
they need to have clearly defined benchmarks embedded that are either quantifiable
or otherwise verified in a way that is robust to uncertainties and is agreed with
all parties. There is no simple single definition for a sustainability standard in any
form of fishing or aquaculture, so each certification or ecolabelling initiative must
therefore define clearly what it means by sustainability, or sustainable management,
or sustainable seafood, or exactly what the standard comprises.
The language of sustainability is catchy but can be easily abused. In the contem-
porary idiom, there are many uses of the word 'sustainable' and its derivations (such
as 'sustainable housing'), and although such language is obviously fashionable and
attractive for marketing purposes, the precise meaning is not clear.
In seafood certification, there is a strong case that can be made for a fixed and
explicit standard which is pre-defined in relation to specific issues of technical
and public concern, and against which verification can be easily conducted. Then
the key issue of quality becomes exactly where to put the 'sustainability bar' in
terms of what type and extent of environmental damage will be considered to be
'sustainable'. This 'setting the bar' becomes a matter of strategic decision made
by the standard owner based on the overall costs and benefits and the level of
acceptability to consumers.
Irrespective of where the bar is set, independent third-party verification is the
only robust way of deciding if a venture complies or not with the standard. For this
to work, it is vital that the standard be fixed, not flexible, so that certifiers are not
subject to lobbying pressure and influence from vested interests. It also depends on
the use of transparent and accountable verification systems and the consistent and
authoritative application of the verification rules by the standard owner.
The final determinant of the quality of a standard is the extent to which ben-
eficial environmental change occurs as a result of implementing the certification
and ecolabelling programme. Numbers of labelled products, countries in which
they are sold, number of certified fisheries, or tonnage of certified fish sold mean