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...
Published in: | Arctic Review on Law and Politics |
---|---|
Main Author: | |
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 |