FAO Guidelines for Ecolabelling in Wild-Capture Fisheries - SEAFOOD Ecolabelling: Principles and Practice - page 59

collects, analyses and disseminates information on the sector operations (catch,
value, prices, fleets, employment);

develops methodology, assesses and monitors the state of wild resources and
elaborates resource management advice;

monitors and advises on the development and management of aquaculture;

provides socio-economic analysis of fisheries and assists in the elaboration of
development and management polices and strategies and institutions;

supports and assists a network of regional fishery commissions; and

monitors and advises on technology development, fish processing and trade.

3.2 The origins of the ecolabelling debate in FAO

The impetus for addressing the issue of ecolabelling of fisheries products in FAO
arose from the launch of the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) initiative by
Unilever PLC/NV and the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF) in 1997. In their joint
Statement of Intent, WWF (the world's largest non-profit conservation organisation)
noted its wish for 'a new approach to ensure more effective management of marine
life', while Unilever PLC/NV, a major buyer of frozen fish and manufacturer of
many of the world's best-known frozen-fish products expressed 'its commitment to
long-term fish stock sustainability to ensure a future for its successful fish business'.
The reactions to the initiative of WWF and Unilever were mixed. While it was
applauded by some industry groups, conservation organisations and governments,
many fisheries stakeholders and governments were initially sceptical about the
intentions of this unlikely partnership between a big corporate player in the fish
processing and retailing business and an environmental NGO which until that time
was perceived as having greater interests in marine conservation than supporting
the fishing industry.
In a report prepared for its Committee for Fisheries, FAO (1996) observed that
industry associations such as the International Fishmeal & Oil Manufacturers Asso-
ciation (IFOMA) and the International Coalition of Fisheries Associations (ICFA)
had very serious reservations about MSC and other similar initiatives and took a
stance of opposition. Others, like the Ground Fish Forum, had not taken a definite
stance but expressed concern. The Latin American Fisheries Development Orga-
nization (OLDEPESCA) rejected the MSC initiative in a resolution adopted at the
Ministerial Meeting in Havana on 6 November 1996. The report also noted that the
initiative was seen positively by countries that had made major efforts towards im-
proved management and believed that they may have good candidates for labelling
among their national fisheries (e.g. Australia, New Zealand).
The International Collective in Support of Fishworkers (ICSF), an India-based
international non-governmental organisation mainly advocating interests of small-
scale fishers in developing countries, was a vocal sceptic of the MSC. ICSF's first
concern was the practicability of applying universal standards that, in the ICSF's