Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) Certification of Arctic Fisheries: Processes and Outcomes

Certification according to private sustainability standards (ecolabelling) has become an important addition to public fisheries management in recent years. The major global ecolabel in terms of comprehensiveness and coverage is the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) Fisheries Standard. Under the MSC S...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Arctic Review on Law and Politics
Main Author: Hønneland, Geir
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: 2021
Subjects:
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/11250/2734534
https://doi.org/10.23865/arctic.v11.2488
id ftnupi:oai:nupi.brage.unit.no:11250/2734534
record_format openpolar
spelling ftnupi:oai:nupi.brage.unit.no:11250/2734534 2023-05-15T14:21:41+02:00 Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) Certification of Arctic Fisheries: Processes and Outcomes Hønneland, Geir 2021-03-19T13:49:58Z application/pdf https://hdl.handle.net/11250/2734534 https://doi.org/10.23865/arctic.v11.2488 eng eng Norges forskningsråd: 257614 Fridtjof Nansens institutt: 393 Arctic Review on Law and Politics. 2020, 11 133-156. urn:issn:1891-6252 https://hdl.handle.net/11250/2734534 https://doi.org/10.23865/arctic.v11.2488 cristin:1859860 Navngivelse-Ikkekommersiell 4.0 Internasjonal http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.no CC-BY-NC 133-156 11 Arctic Review on Law and Politics Peer reviewed Journal article 2021 ftnupi https://doi.org/10.23865/arctic.v11.2488 2022-10-13T05:49:59Z Certification according to private sustainability standards (ecolabelling) has become an important addition to public fisheries management in recent years. The major global ecolabel in terms of comprehensiveness and coverage is the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) Fisheries Standard. Under the MSC Standard, the status of the fishery’s target stocks, its impact on the wider ecosystem and the effectiveness of its management system are assessed. Becoming and remaining certified requires continuous behavioural adaptation from fisheries through a fine-meshed system of conditions attached to certification. In this article, MSC certification of two clusters of fisheries in Arctic waters is discussed, one large- and one small-scale. In the Barents Sea cod and haddock fisheries, the main obstacle to certification has been the fisheries’ impact on endangered, threatened and protected (ETP) species and bottom habitats, and in order to remain certified beyond the first five-year certification period, the fishing companies have had to introduce a number of voluntary measures beyond what is required by law. In the local lumpfish fisheries in Greenland, Iceland and Norway, conditions attached to certification have been related to the effects of these fisheries on seabirds and marine mammals. Here essential parts of a management regime, such as biological reference points and harvest control rules, have come about as a direct result of MSC certification. MSC certification is no panacea, but it seems to have found a niche as a supplement to national legislation and international agreements. publishedVersion Article in Journal/Newspaper Arctic Arctic Arctic review on law and politics Barents Sea Greenland Iceland Norwegian Institute of international affairs: NUPI Research Online (Brage) Arctic Barents Sea Greenland Norway Arctic Review on Law and Politics 11 0 133
institution Open Polar
collection Norwegian Institute of international affairs: NUPI Research Online (Brage)
op_collection_id ftnupi
language English
description Certification according to private sustainability standards (ecolabelling) has become an important addition to public fisheries management in recent years. The major global ecolabel in terms of comprehensiveness and coverage is the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) Fisheries Standard. Under the MSC Standard, the status of the fishery’s target stocks, its impact on the wider ecosystem and the effectiveness of its management system are assessed. Becoming and remaining certified requires continuous behavioural adaptation from fisheries through a fine-meshed system of conditions attached to certification. In this article, MSC certification of two clusters of fisheries in Arctic waters is discussed, one large- and one small-scale. In the Barents Sea cod and haddock fisheries, the main obstacle to certification has been the fisheries’ impact on endangered, threatened and protected (ETP) species and bottom habitats, and in order to remain certified beyond the first five-year certification period, the fishing companies have had to introduce a number of voluntary measures beyond what is required by law. In the local lumpfish fisheries in Greenland, Iceland and Norway, conditions attached to certification have been related to the effects of these fisheries on seabirds and marine mammals. Here essential parts of a management regime, such as biological reference points and harvest control rules, have come about as a direct result of MSC certification. MSC certification is no panacea, but it seems to have found a niche as a supplement to national legislation and international agreements. publishedVersion
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Hønneland, Geir
spellingShingle Hønneland, Geir
Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) Certification of Arctic Fisheries: Processes and Outcomes
author_facet Hønneland, Geir
author_sort Hønneland, Geir
title Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) Certification of Arctic Fisheries: Processes and Outcomes
title_short Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) Certification of Arctic Fisheries: Processes and Outcomes
title_full Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) Certification of Arctic Fisheries: Processes and Outcomes
title_fullStr Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) Certification of Arctic Fisheries: Processes and Outcomes
title_full_unstemmed Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) Certification of Arctic Fisheries: Processes and Outcomes
title_sort marine stewardship council (msc) certification of arctic fisheries: processes and outcomes
publishDate 2021
url https://hdl.handle.net/11250/2734534
https://doi.org/10.23865/arctic.v11.2488
geographic Arctic
Barents Sea
Greenland
Norway
geographic_facet Arctic
Barents Sea
Greenland
Norway
genre Arctic
Arctic
Arctic review on law and politics
Barents Sea
Greenland
Iceland
genre_facet Arctic
Arctic
Arctic review on law and politics
Barents Sea
Greenland
Iceland
op_source 133-156
11
Arctic Review on Law and Politics
op_relation Norges forskningsråd: 257614
Fridtjof Nansens institutt: 393
Arctic Review on Law and Politics. 2020, 11 133-156.
urn:issn:1891-6252
https://hdl.handle.net/11250/2734534
https://doi.org/10.23865/arctic.v11.2488
cristin:1859860
op_rights Navngivelse-Ikkekommersiell 4.0 Internasjonal
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.no
op_rightsnorm CC-BY-NC
op_doi https://doi.org/10.23865/arctic.v11.2488
container_title Arctic Review on Law and Politics
container_volume 11
container_issue 0
container_start_page 133
_version_ 1766294403430744064