Greenland's offshore Greenland halibut fishery and role of the Marine Stewardship Council certification: A governance case study
The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) certification is the market-leading seafood eco-label, including in deepsea fisheries, about which there are growing concerns around sustainability. Greenland is economically dependent on deep-sea fisheries, including for Greenland halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglos...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier BV
2021
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10104171/7/Long_1-s2.0-S0308597X20302736-main.pdf https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10104171/ |
| Summary: | The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) certification is the market-leading seafood eco-label, including in deepsea fisheries, about which there are growing concerns around sustainability. Greenland is economically dependent on deep-sea fisheries, including for Greenland halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides). The offshore halibut fishery, which employs demersal trawls (800–1,400 m), obtained MSC certification in 2017. This provides an opportunity to critically assess the governance of deep-sea resources, with reference to the MSC certification. The Marine Protected Area Governance (MPAG) framework, originally designed to analyse MPAs and adapted for this study, finds an effective system of state-led governance, supported by scientific, certification and industry actors. Arising from its socio-economic importance, the industry’s considerable influence is used to align management with the MSC certification. Outcomes directly attributable to engagement with the MSC certification include the introduction of a management plan and new benthic research programmes. However, questions are raised about the certification, providing case study examples of existing criticisms. Assessments are weak with respect to benthic habitats and over-reliant on the definitive, expert judgement of Conformity Assessment Bodies (CABs), whose independence is questioned. Separate MSC assessments of Greenlandic and German vessels in the fleet provided an opportunity to consider the consistency and robustness of the process, which raised serious concerns. Two different CABs found the benthic impact of vessels using the same gear in the same area to be sustainable, by employing fundamentally different and conflicting logic. This represents a serious failing of certification process, undermining the assurance it is intended to provide. |
|---|