MSC Seafood Futures Forum 2018 | Seafood Expo Global, Brussels

MSC Seafood Futures Forum 2018 | Seafood Expo Global, Brussels

Welcome everybody my name’s Steve Hall.
I’m your moderator for this morning. I’m delighted to see so many people here and
especially delighted to see that we’ve got over 300 people joining us online so
welcome to you too wherever you are. The theme of the conversation today is
around the future of sustainable seafood and the role of the MSC within that
future and that’s a really important and quite critical topic and I hope that we
can do it justice in the time that we’ve got available to us and given
that time is tight I’m going to skip through the logistics very rapidly.
Bathrooms as you know are upstairs fire exit come out through the exit that
you came in through. If you hear a fire alarm there is not a fire alarm scheduled so if it happens it’s for real. The timing of the event
will be as follows. We will have a short introductory overview from Rupert. We
will then hear from Nicolas around some of the issues that the MSC is
reflecting upon. That will be followed by a short presentation by Ally Dingwall
– a keynote presentation to just provide some of his perspectives on this topic and
then we’ll have a panel discussion followed by a period of questions. I know
that there are other events that are happening immediately after this one and
some people will need to leave early to prepare for those so to be give you a
chance to ask questions we’ll try and make sure that we allow at least 10 or
15 minutes for that. During the questions Rupert and Nicolas will also
join the panel. If there’s a demand for questions following
that they’re perfectly prepared to stay on beyond that to ask more technical
and specific questions around the MSC for those who wish to for
for an hour or so. For those of you online if you use the hashtag #SeafoodFutures we will have the questions and we will try and introduce
those as and when is appropriate. My job is to help you have a productive and
valuable conversation and a stimulating and balanced discussion and to that end
may I ask you all to keep your questions your comments – and panelists your responses – succinct and to the point and can we please avoid
any kind of long and formal statements because I think this isn’t the forum for
that kind of thing. Also, we are recording the whole thing and the presentations
will be available online to you so please there’s no need to record
anything. Please don’t we’ve got it all there for you as we move forward. Without
further ado then let me introduce the CEO of the MSC known to all of you I’m sure Rupert Howes to provide some opening comments. Good morning it’s a real
pleasure to welcome you to the Seafood Futures Forum. I keep thinking there’s a
sustainable in there but maybe that’s what we’re going to debate. Given all
of the competing demands on your time at this busy show I really do appreciate
you all getting here before the show opens to join us and as Stephen has just
said there’s over 300 people registered to join us online. We’ve looked at the mix of people joining us. We’ve got
harvesters, processors, retailers, food service, NGOs and media and I think that
very much reflects the MSC multi-stakeholder model that we’re very
committed to. I’d like to take this opportunity as well – I can’t actually see
anything – but Werne Kiene MSC’s chair of trustees is in the audience somewhere
I don’t know Werne if you can stand up. Or at least I hope you’re in the
audience. There we are at the back. The MSC invests a huge amount in governance. I
think it underpins the trust and credibility of the programme. We have an
International Board of Trustees. 15 individuals – and hardwired into the DNA
are two seats for the industry, two seats for the market, two seats for scientists
and two seats for NGOs. Again reflecting that balance and that multi-stakeholder
model. We have a Technical Advisory Board made up of leading experts in fisheries
science and supply chain integrity and traceability and we also have a
stakeholder council – a Stakeholder Advisory Council has recently been recalibrated. We had our inaugural meeting just last week and
again the membership of that group reflects our multi-stakeholder model
with the balance between industry and NGOs. In fact we have several members
of our Stakeholder Advisory Council in the room. I don’t know if you want to stand up and
show where you are. Don’t be shy. And we also have members from our Technical
Advisory Board as well. So I mention all of that as well as MSC staff from
across Europe and America as well and Asia. And so please do join us afterwards if there are any more questions you want to go
through with the MSC. So it definitely feels like a moment in time for the oceans. The
United Nations hosted the inaugural oceans conference for the UN at the
headquarters in New York last summer in June 2017. In October, the European Union (EU) hosted the latest ‘Our Oceans Conference’ in Malta and just in March of this year The
Economist hosted their fifth World Oceans summit. I mean without doubt oceans are on the map, they’re on the political map. And I
also think you know fuelled by outstanding programmes like Blue Planet 2
more media interest that the oceans are becoming a much more public issue. You
know people care deeply and the particular resonance around around the
issue of plastics. So are our oceans in trouble? I think they are. You look at the impacts of acidification and climate change
devastating coral reefs and some of the facts and figures that are being talked
about are really troubling. I’m not a reefs expert but I understand that business
as usual if we cannot keep warming below two degrees will mean something like 70
or 80 percent of warm water reefs will be gone and there’s very little we can
do about that. Climate change impacts are already impacting on MSC-certified
fisheries. Fish migration patterns are changing, reproductive health is being
impacted and the number of MSC fisheries have lost their certificate as fish
have changed their migration patterns. We’re also told that by 2050
there will be more plastic in the ocean than fish. Now I have no idea how accurate those figures are but when you think we produce 280
million tons of plastic every year much of it for single-use and estimates of 8
to 12 million tons hitting the oceans every year it’s hard to see how we wouldn’t
get up to that statistic. And in relation to fisheries a third of global fish stocks –
assessed stocks – are now classified as overfished Now that’s a three-fold increase
since the 1970s. So I think it’s fair to say at the very least our oceans are under a
huge stress and pressure and particularly at the time that we’re moving
from 7 billion people on this planet to 10 billion people and a desperate need
to get more sustainable low-carbon protein. So it’s actually – just sorry one
other fact that I found quite amazing the United Nations Framework Convention
on Climate Change has estimated that by 2020 it’s going to cost a hundred
billion dollars every year – each and every year – to mitigate the effects of a
degraded ocean. So I think now really is the time for action. And despite the
trends and the scale of the challenges I’m actually an optimist. I think many of
you who know me know that I’m an optimist and you have to be an optimist
to run the MSC because it can be challenging on occasion. But my optimism
stems from the fact that we now have the United Nations Sustainable Development
Goals. 17 goals to end poverty, protect the planet and to ensure prosperity for
all. A route map to try and move us from in many senses an unsustainable system
of production and a rather inequitable one to a more sustainable
and more equitable system of production and consumption. I think what’s so
enormous about the SDGs is this plan for planet Earth has been signed by a
hundred and ninety three nations and we have a dedicated oceans target SDG 14
life below the ocean with 10 separate goals that seek to conserve and
sustainably use the seek to conserve and sustainably use the oceans seas and
marine resources. And I think that resonates particularly for the MSC because
the MSC is primarily about sustainable resource use within ecological limits. We care passionately about ocean health and
resilience and biodiversity. We care passionately about the livelihoods and
the ability to generate sustainable seafood supplies into the future. So
there’s never been a better time given all of this attention given this route
map to galvanize action to improve the health of our oceans and I think it’s
really important a that we’re going to be reflecting on what this means for the
MSC – we’re 20 years old. But what does it mean? What’s our place through your
continued engagement and leadership to contribute to the delivery of the SDG
targets? So I’m very much looking forward to our keynote speaker Ally Dingwall and
to the panel discussion and to hearing your views in the question and answer
session. One last comment. Clearly there’s an absolute urgency to all of this and
four of the SDG 14 goals are due to be delivered by 2020, you know barely two
years away. Those include ending overfishing, eradicating IUU (Illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing) and banning harmful subsidies and effectively regulating harvesting. I think the SDG
framework is singly ambitious and it’s also very very obvious that there’s no
silver bullet to these challenges. It’s going to need partnership and
collaboration. It’s going to need public policy reform. It’s going to need
advocacy, awareness-raising and I also believe credible market-based
programmes to help to get those signals right and incentivise the right sort of
behaviour to take us in that direction. So I will leave my opening remarks there
and before we move to Ally Dingwall’s presentation we have Nicolas Guichoux,
MSC’s Global Commercial Director who will give you an update on progress this
last year, key trends and and where we’re heading to. So over to Nicolas. Thank you. Good morning everyone. So our theme for
the Seafood Futures Forum is ‘Fit For the Future: How the MSC can stay the
course’. Rupert just made a reference to the UN SDG’s especially on goal 14
which is about the conservation and sustainable use of our oceans. Today we
are going to try and explore how the MSC programme fits into a global effort to use
our oceans more sustainably. So in terms of where we currently fit in, the UN
Biodiversity Indicators Partnership (BIP) is a global programme that allows
governments to measure progress towards biodiversity targets. They have
identified the MSC as a tool to deliver and measure a number of these targets
including SDG 14. The MSC was also recognised by GSSI last year for meeting
all essential components of its benchmarking against the FAO international guidelines for certification and ecolabelling programmes. We are unique
in also meeting the supplementary components on issues such as vulnerable
marine ecosystem, inclusive stakeholder engagement and providing public evidence
behind scoring decisions. In addition, we, the MSC is also one of the few standard
setters globally, not just for seafood, that meet the three codes of good
practices of ISEAL for standard setting, assurance and impact of its programme. So one could argue that is more than enough to demonstrate the role and credibility
of our programme. However the MSC is still challenged by some NGOs to keep raising
its sustainability bar. On the other hand many certified fisheries complain
they can’t keep up with the pace of changes in the MSC programme. Our ambition is to strike a delicate and pragmatic balance to engage
fisheries in order to drive improvements. So indeed today 14 percent of global
wild capture is MSC certified or in assessment implying that 86 percent is
not. So this graph shows that while we continue to make progress and drive
improvement there is still a very long way to go before all fisheries are able
to engage in the programme. this limits the change that the MSC Standard helps to
deliver. We’ve demonstrated that our theory of change works. The MSC has been a catalyst for more than a thousand improvements in fisheries worldwide as
reported in our Global Impacts Report that I invite you to consult on our
website. But most fisheries improvement projects such as SFP, O2 and WWF – I know many are in the room – use our standard as a framework for improving
fisheries which are not ready to meet the MSC bar. But what this graph doesn’t
show is that many of the certified landings come from countries that are
already considered the best in the world when it comes to management: Denmark,
Norway, New Zealand, Canada, USA. All have more than 50% of the landings certified.
And this year Iceland announced that 90 percent of the landings are now
certified. The Icelandic announcement followed the certification of several
new fisheries such as mackerel, tusk, wolf fish, blue ling and two world first
for new species capelin and lumpfish. Other firsts around
the globe we’re Greenland halibut and abalone in Western Australia. Western
Australian rock lobster also became the first fishery to be recertified
successfully for the fourth time. But I’d like to focus today on two fisheries
which demonstrate how the MSC programme performs at its best. The first
is North Sea Brown Shrimp a very old fishery that used to trawl on
horseback but now comprises 400 boats that catch 30 thousand tons of shrimp
annually. In the pre-assessment more than ten years ago serious questions were asked about the fishery and its management and it was
shown not to meet MSC requirement at the time. A new collaboration to achieve MSC
certification started in 2015. Before this, there was no quotas or
restrictions on fishing efforts. The University of Hamburg and a working group helped to develop a harvest control rules to ensure the healthy growth of
the stock. During the assessment, a coalition of eight conservation NGOs
also contributed constructively to the outcome. The fishery will have to fulfil
several conditions in the coming years to keep the MSC certificate and several
eNGOs and the fishery will facilitate together the project. So when so often
the attention focuses on the few fisheries stakeholders cannot agree on, this is a
great example indeed of a constructive multi-stakeholder collaboration to
support a fishery. This is what healthy oceans means and demonstrates how the
MSC standard can provide a common framework. The second example is
less nice in a way because unfortunately sometimes things don’t go well. This year
the MSC certificate for the Southern Gulf of St. Lawrence snow crab trap fishery in Canada was suspended due in part to the mortality of 12 right whales in Canadian
water the fishery was found to no longer meet the MSC standard related to
endangered, threatened and protected species. Suspension is always difficult to
take but in this case again we have witnessed a very proactive response from
the fishery. Our standard is really designed to allow
us to stay engaged with fisheries because it is only by being at the table that the MSC programme can work with fisheries to influence and drive
improvements. And as you can see on the screen, we are very pleased that the
fisheries remains committed to the MSC programme and wish them every success in implementing a Corrective Action Plan. But we’re
also working with fisheries that are not yet sustainable. The MSC is often seen as a standard setter and ecolabelling programme only. But we do a lot behind the
scenes to support broader sustainable development. This is what we termed ‘The
pathways to sustainability’. We have helped to build capacity in fisheries
and work with FIP providers and management authorities across the world. This includes working to develop multi fisheries
pre-assessment projects in 14 countries you can see here, often aimed at
supporting small-scale inshore fisheries to build action plans. The most recent
one is actually a collaboration in India between the Indian Central Marine
Fisheries Research, WWF India and a number of Indian seafood
processors. 10 fisheries including blue swimming crab, shrimp and cuttlefish have
been identified for targeting MSC certification. This is a very exciting
project in a very important country for seafood. But we also fund
external projects that we’re not involved in. The MSC through the
Global Fisheries Sustainability Fund awarded more than £200,000 pounds in
2017 to five projects that will aid small-scale and developing world
fisheries in improving their sustainability. Examples you can see also on the previous slide. This slide shows actually
something we provided last year to two students with scholarships to help
fund the research on the trade flows of octopus from small-scale fisheries in
East Africa and the use of LED lights on nets to reduce turtle bycatch in Kenyan
artisanal fisheries. And now to the markets. As you know our programme relies on market demand for ecolabelled product which
provide incentives for fisheries to become and remain sustainable. So I would like to update you on some of the progress observed over the past
year. We are about to reach 29,000 MSC labelled products sold in 108 countries. In 2017, this represented 20% growth in volume globally, which is one of
the strongest in recent years. In terms of volume per country and the
distribution of MSC labelled product Germany is still by far the leading market
globally followed by the UK, the U.S. France and Sweden. The fastest growth, six
times, occurred in China followed by Italy where we have very strong growth
as well Japan Portugal and Poland. All countries where sustainability has
become increasingly important for seafood professionals but we still have
to do make a lot of effort with consumers. I mentioned last year that we
have less growth in demand from the wet fish counter and food service sectors
which is why this is a new strategic focus for us. But we have seen a recent
progress. Eroski and Tesco came on board last year. This year it is Coop Sweden
that got all their fresh fish counters certified. Carrefour will have them by the
end of this year – which is quite a big deal in France where more than half of
the fish is consumed fresh. Carrefour will focus their efforts on the top species
white cod and farmed salmon. Both species are already 100% MSC and ASC. As one of our fastest growing market, in Japan there is a real drive for
sustainability, mainly triggered by the seafood sourcing policy of Tokyo
Olympics 2020 and a great work of retailers Aeon and Japan Coop. It is
interesting to notice that Mahura Nichiro, Nissui and Kyokuto all
introduced MSC labelled products for the first time last year. This is a
significant move as we have witnessed in other markets that when brand leaders
come on board it becomes a catalyst for the rest of the market to follow. It’s
also significant more globally because Mahura Nichiro, Nissui and Kyokuto are
amongst the top 10 largest seafood companies in the world. In food service
Finnish Cruise Line Tallink Silja became the first in the world to serve MSC
certified seafood and in China and Japan the first independent restaurants were
certified. And this year as you can see here on the slide we’ve seen several new
developments in food public procurement policies across Europe. MSC is often the
only reference actually for wild seafood. In October this year, the
European Union hosted ‘Our oceans conference’ – in October last year. Our oceans conference’ where the MSC launched a new partnership initiative called ‘The
2020 Leaders for a Living Ocean’ we gathered commitments from 27 companies dedicated to making real progress toward the SDGs by increasing availability of
certified sustainable seafood. Please note that you know companies new
companies can still still join this initiative. At the meeting the MSC also
announced its ambition to 20% of global wild capture to be engaged in the programme by 2020. And to achieve this we will deliver new tools to better enable
fisheries in the Global South to progress toward the MSC bar. We will also focus on large marine ecosystems under represented in the MSC programme where the threat to biodiversity is high. Among these 27 companies were Sainsbury’s, Carrefour, Aeon, Coles, Kroger, IKEA… Sorry I won’t name all of
them. We also know that consumers play a
key role in the programme. To raise awareness on sustainable seafood choice
and educate the public on sustainable fishing our offices around the world have
organised over 20 sustainable seafood campaigns over the past 12 months
often jointly with the ASC, WWF or other NGOs. One of the most successful took
place in France for a week where MSC collaborated with many commercial
partners but also institutional partners such as France Nature Environment, the Musee Oceanographic of Monaco or the Paris aquarium. I’m sorry I won’t name all of them. The impact was pretty impressive with our partners
reaching almost four million online followers and 40 million consumers
through retailer’s catalogues. The team ran public debates and launched a French
translation of a new global educational film for schools which just last week
won a prestigious award in the UK. For the next topic… In our pre-conference survey
you voted the next session the most wanted. Every two years the MSC
commissions one of the largest seafood consumer surveys in the world covering
over 25,000 consumers across 22 markets Today we have hot from the press
the first results. Really hot from the press from last week. So the results are that ocean pollution is high on the public agenda ranking as the top ocean
concerns for consumers today. However overfishing is a close second in almost
all countries. In the last survey consumers rank sustainability as second
only to taste and quality as a motivator when purchasing seafood. This year in all
but 7 markets price now ranks above sustainability indicating a more
challenging environment than two years ago and reinforcing the need to emphasise
personal benefits. We are encouraged that consumer awareness of
the blue MSC label has increased globally from 38 to 41 percent across
the 22 markets and consumer trust remains high at 67% globally. All of that
our average obviously. Full results will be shared over the next few months. Please click the link at the bottom of our emails to ensure you are
invited to webinars that we will organise in in the next few months. Finally, I would like to update you on
two key projects aimed at improving the integrity of the MSC programme. The first
one is about improving traceability by putting information about project origin
on a digital platform and reducing the time it takes to do trace backs. We term
this key data elements. Over 2018, we will work with the ASC to run a proof of
concept with six supply chains. This will include large and small
companies across the globe and ones that are already using digital traceability
systems. But also those that don’t because we’ve seen that you know in over four
thousand chain of custody holders around the world we have a lot of
difference in terms of traceability systems in place in those companies. If
successful, a wider pilot will be rolled out that is open for all the MSC and ASC
partners to join. The second work stream is focused on social considerations. Over
the past few years our stakeholders have highlighted the increasing importance of
social issues in the seafood sector. It is today outside of MSC’s core mission
and a complex issue but through collaboration with other standard
setters and through mechanisms that foster transparency the MSC can help efforts to understand and address this. So we are proposing to introduce an eligibility requirement for fisheries to disclose measures, policies and practices they have in place to ensure the absence of forced
labour. For the supply chain we are proposing to introduce a requirement for
higher risk land-based supply chains to undertake a third party audit with a
social standard. We are actively consulting now but we expect
to release the first of the new requirements this August. So as you can
see another very busy year full of exciting new developments for the MSC. Our programme is now truly global with strongest growth in new countries ,new
market segments, new commodities and new projects. But our programme is also
challenged by some stakeholders from industry and NGOs with often
very conflicting views on what the MSC should do. As you can imagine it can be
difficult for us to navigate through such opposite demands. But that is the
unique role that we strive to fulfil. And we recognise it can be even harder
for the users of our programme. Therefore, I’m very pleased to introduce one of
these users – your keynote speaker Ally Dingwall from Sainsbury’s. Sainsbury’s
is one of the trailblazers of sustainable sourcing in the UK and
certification in the retail sector. They have worked with the MSC programme for
more than 15 years now. Ally was actually one of the retail industry’s first
dedicated Aquaculture and Fisheries Managers and is very knowledgeable about
the challenges and opportunities that sustainability brings to businesses such as Sainsbury’s. So we are lucky that we will share his vast
experience with us today. Welcome Ally. Thank you Nicolas. Morning everyone. Wow there’s a lot of you isn’t there. It’s a bit disconcerting. Firstly I’d like
to thank the MSC for the opportunity to talk to you all today and engage in
the dialogue with the panelists. I think it should be a productive dialogue
and it’s great to see so many big hitters in the audience – well slightly
disconcerting. Nicolas and Rupert have given you
the big picture overview of why this issue is important and some of
the things that we need to tackle and that are being tackled. But I’d like to
give you a more of a local business perspective about what we’ve done and
why we’ve done it and how it links into that big picture. First a little about
Sainsbury’s. You have to you have to have this. It’s obligatory. That’s the
Sainsbury’s group at a glance. We’re not just a grocery retailer, we’ve got
quite a diverse portfolio. But obviously I represent them the fish and seafood
element of our supermarket chain where we have over 1,400 stores only in the UK. We’re a UK business with 180,000 colleagues, 27 million customer
transactions per week and a 16 percent market share in the grocery market and
that makes us the second largest retailer in the UK. our company values. So
our business is underpinned by five core business values and they shape our
everyday business activity. And those business values are embedded in our
sustainability plan which has a number of targets linking to each business
value and a steering group and a management group which ensures
that we are on track and delivering against those targets. So we have targets
and metrics in place to measure our performance and report on our
performance. Our sustainability plan was launched in 2011 under the 20×20 banner where we had the same five values with 20 commitments
and a hundred delivery goals. We then revised, refreshed, reviewed that plan in
2015 and rebranded it. We do that periodically just to make sure that our
thought processes are in line and our targets are in line with current
thinking and thought leadership. And that retained the business values they are
fundamentally sound but then we aligned ourselves with the Sustainable
Development Goals United Nations Sustainable Development
Goals because we’d recognised as a business that we need to play our part and we all
as individuals need to play our part in delivering the big picture. And we are now at that point in time where we are reviewing as normal business process
where we go after 2020 as part of normal business process. So what does this mean
for fish? Back in 2020 our sourcing with integrity value included fish and we
made the decision that by 2020 all the fish we sell will be independently
certified as sustainable. And in 2015 / 2016 obviously we aligned that with SDG14 and in particular 14 for end overfishing
IUU, destructive fishing practices. So we’re aligned in every respect recognising that they are ambitious
targets. So why did we adopt the MSC is a question that’s often asked? Well we
believe we looked at the standards that were available and the MSC had
credibility. A governance framework, a robust governance framework – was
independent and in particular it did measure impacts – it could demonstrate improvement and it had global applicability. Fisheries
sustainability and seafood is complex and consumers understand that
there are issues with this but they don’t take a deep dive and many
consumers don’t take a deep dive into the issue. So we needed a vehicle where
we could demonstrate responsibility and sustainability to consumers across the
whole portfolio of fish, wild caught fish and seafood
that we sell and the MSC delivered that simple credible and robust message for
us. And it delivered a platform for improvement. Because at the very start of
this, when you make a commitment you have to understand what you’re selling and
what the pathway is to delivery. You can’t just make a commitment and say yeah we’ll worry about how we deliver that later. So through the fishery improvement
process the MSC delivered that platform for improvement which was
important to us. The MSC also delivers the ability for us to
connect our local agenda under our sustainability plan to the global vision through as I say credible FIPs. The MSC standard is the basis for
the work plan for a credible FIP and through certification to link globally
to the SDG target. Credibility of the MSC has been underpinned by the GSSI
benchmarking framework which further added to the credibility and the
robustness of the scheme and we see that as a really positive development. So no
presentation would be complete without a little update on how we’re doing. So you can see on the right here – the chart linking to our progress post 2011
when we made the initial commitment – we had obviously been selling MSC
certified seafood before that. We were on a steady pathway to delivering our
target currently 86 percent of our wild caught seafood by value is certified to
the MSC standard and carries the ecolabel and chain of custody. And that’s over 240
million pounds worth of sales and we have plans in place to deliver for the
rest of our supply base. Why do we do this? This is quite intuitive actually. We are not a legal minimum business. We market ourselves as a
responsible business and that responsibility is a fundamental
expectation of our customers. Our customers see this is important obviously. And
expect us to do the right thing. In fact when it comes to fish and seafood they
expect everything that we sell to be sustainable and sometimes a surprise
when we by our own definition say everything isn’t sustainable, there are
things to do here, everything isn’t perfect but we are
on that path. So we need to meet our customer needs and expectations. Obviously we have other stakeholders needs that we need to meet from a
reputation, recognition and regulation perspective. And that includes engagement
with the NGO sector in respect to their needs. But there is a fundamental
economic case for sustainability and doing the work that we do. And that’s in
securing supply of raw materials for the future. So if we invest in the
sustainability agenda and work with our supply base then we’re going to have
fish to sell today, tomorrow, next year, ten years time. So a sound economic
rationale. But it is a balance and it’s going to be a key theme of today’s
discussion I think. We’re constantly unconsciously balancing the needs of all
these stakeholders as we move through time whilst constantly improving our
performance. And it’s the same way in terms of delivering a triple bottom line
of sustainability of social, environmental and economic. There is a
balance to be had between all of those elements of sustainability and it
changes. It’s a highly dynamic environment but we’ve got to focus on
the key outcome at the end of the day where we deliver against all of these
things. And we do this in the context of a highly diverse supply chain and a
global supply chain with diverse stakeholder needs within each of those
countries and oceans. And again we need to balance that with the backdrop that
our objective is to deliver affordable, quality food for our
customers and we need to employ that balance and deliver that
balance in order to deliver that or else if we just if we take a very very high
view on sustainability then we probably and certainly in the very early days
would have excluded 90% of our supply chain. The key thing is here that
we need to work together in realistic time skills to deliver the desired
outcome and that sometimes takes compromise and certainly takes balance. So how have we done this? Well how have most businesses done this? It requires a fundamental business commitment to
engagement to organisational engagement and dialogue. This costs a lot
to have this dialogue it just doesn’t happen. If we were to give an instruction
to our supply base say “go and do this” in all chances it wouldn’t happen. We need to
invest in that dialogue. And we need to be willing to have that dialogue with
our competitors on a pre competitive basis. And that was something that was
quite new 10 years ago. It’s far more common now. But we recognise that we couldn’t do this on our own. There’s a lot of heavy lifting to do here so we
need to engage with our competitors and other retailers and stakeholders on a global basis to drive improvement at a global scale. And
sometimes at a local scale. I have to give massive credit to our supply
base here. A supply base obviously thinks like us and primary
suppliers in particular who’ve done a huge amount of the heavy lifting in this. And also to sustainable fisheries partnership who in the early days we
partnered with to ensure that we were on the right track – that
our thought processes were consistent with the NGO community and workable
and achievable. And we also have engaged in many different organisations
which have delivered global outreach and again done some of the heavy lifting
as have our supply base. Innovation has been absolutely key. And we need to
engage far more in the innovation agenda and embrace the innovation and adapt to
change to ensure that we deliver the improvements in a cost effective way. Standards for us have obviously played an important part in
this in delivering assurance on a global basis. But we need to make sure that
those standards are credible and robust and have a robust framework that meet
the needs of all stakeholders and that can sometimes be controversial because
sometimes things get out of balance. So this is about the future. Where do we go
from here from a business perspective and from an MSC perspective? I think the
takeaway for me is: I don’t believe that the model we have is broken. I think
fundamentally the model is sound. I think what we need to do is we need to build
on what we have. We need to make sure the framework is ever more robust that
if fisheries are certified that they should be certified. Whether that’s
through building peer-reviewed capacity and ensuring that certification bodies they are consistent and robust. And that we
maintain that robust framework for all stakeholders. But there has to be balance.
We can’t deliver the needs of all stakeholders right now all the time. We
need to engage more in collaborative dialogue. We need to ensure that we adapt
new technologies and take account of new evidence and use scientific evidence in
the assessment in the certification and in the improvement process. And at the
end of the day we need to make sure that we do this in a cost-effective manner
because we need to be cost effective we need to sell affordable food and things
need to be achievable for our supply chain at the end of the day. And if we do
this the end the day as I say I think the framework is in place. We will
deliver against the vision and we need to stay connected with the vision and
not lose sight of that. I think sometimes we can lose sight of that and it all
becomes a bit competitive. But if we do work together collaboratively, build on the framework we can deliver for the MSC vision. They can deliver against their vision and deliver against
SDG 14 and that would be a great place to be. Thank you. Ally Dingwall ladies and gentlemen thank
you very much Ally. You don’t get to go you go to go and sit down there and
could I ask our other panel members to join us please. Ally has been
very well introduced earlier. Let me introduce the other members of
the panel. We have in running order as they walk across the stage indeed. We
have Amanda Nixon who’s a Director of International Fisheries for the Pew
Charitable Trusts. Annelie Selander who’s the Group Sustainability Director for
Nomad Foods and Tor Bjørklund Larsen the Sustainability Advisor for Norwegian
Fisheries Association. Please go steady on the vodka because you will be grilled carefully in
the next little while. Let me ask you all about that bigger
picture. For you if you think about what’s happened in the last four or five
years what’s changed either socially, technologically, politically or
in terms indeed of what we know, what we’ve learned and how have those changes
altered the landscape and the expectations for the Marine Stewardship
Council? Who’s like to start? It’s only a small question. Ally? There’s a
fundamental in this for me and strangely enough I was asked this question
last week in another fora on what’s changed and I think it is
willingness to collaborate. It’s a you know on a pre-competitive basis. Ten
years ago you wouldn’t have seen retailers sitting in the room together and talking
about pre-competitive issues and recognising the need to move the
dial on this and recognising that we can only do this by working together. I think
more recently and there’s be more willingness and a more adaptive approach
by some members of the NGO sector who historically may have
taken a very very hard view on issues or recognising that that probably
isn’t the way to drive improvement and that by maybe taking a softer view and engaging in the dialogue achieving outcomes in a slightly longer time scale that we might
need it is actually the way to deliver change Well if we go even further back than five
years. I think over the last decade things have changed fundamentally in the
industry with the collaboration and and the co-operation across the industry with the NGOs and with companies and I think that the MSC has
been an amazing catalyst for the way that sustainability has become
embedded into the individual company’s strategies. And when we walk around the
Brussels Expo here we can say that that certainly a lot of it may be window
painting. We see the MSC signs everywhere. But I think that the way
of thinking has evolved incredibly and I think that the way
that the MSC has facilitated this has been beyond any
expectations and I think that the real results of it will be
seen when we look ten years back. I think we will
really realise how how profound this change has been. Interesting. Annelie? It was mentioned before but what we see
is that consumers have for a while said that they are willing to change but we
haven’t really seen the change. But what we’re seeing now is that sustainability
becomes this driver of preference. That consumers are actually acting the way
they’ve said and I think that is a big big change. But they also think there’s
an issue with it and they start asking for transparency. So we’re
going to have to be willing to open up and we’re gonna have to become more
transparent. Amanda? From the other side of the fence so to speak. Well I would
hope at this point that speaking on behalf of an NGO doesn’t put us on the
other side of the fence given the importance of collaboration as it’s been
outlined. I would say I’ll go back even further and say since the inception of
the MSC there has been a large-scale change across global fisheries
governance and it’s moved in the direction that one would like to see it
move in terms of increased and more accountable governance. But it also means
that the role of the MSC changes. So before where it was the benchmark now
you see a lot of fisheries governance and management processes in large part
catalysed I believe by the MSC moving towards that same level of management or
aspiring to that. And it means that the whole notion of sustainability is not
a static concept. So it raises the question now of where does MSC fit into
that broader playing field? But I think that we have to acknowledge that
there are a whole series of very positive changes in that broad landscape
that have been catalysed either directly or indirectly by the MSC. And you’ve
alluded to something there which I think kind of is bubbling around both from
Nicolas’ presentation and elsewhere around this issue of balance and the
shifting landscape of sustainability. And it seems that one of the key questions
that is being asked is what’s the optimal pace of change in the standard? Setting any goal, any management book will tell you it has to be
challenging but achievable. And if it’s not challenging then there’s no point. If
it’s not felt to be achievable then it’s very demotivating. How do we
navigate and find that right balance between an advancing standard and
avoiding demotivation? Well as as I think Nicolas mentioned in his address key
notes I come from one of the most privileged nations in the world in terms
of achieving MSC certification where Norway’s you know generally regarded as
one of the top performers in fisheries management. So we’ve picked all
the lowest hanging fruits and that has taken us up to more than 90 percent of
our volumes MSC certified. But one thing that has changed a lot over the last
5 years is the MSC standard itself. It has raised the bar and and we still
haven’t caught up to that part because of the lag and the time difference in
implementing new standards and I’m quite aware that as a client,
as a user of the standard we we have some real pains to go through over the
upcoming years in fulfilling conditions to meet the standard that we
are subject to now. And so I would say that stability should be the main
goal of the MSC standard at this point. Because now even I as a clients from the
most privileged fishery nation in the world even I feel that there are some pains in this process. Now if I were a developing
nation aspiring MSC fishery, I would probably be a lot more frustrated. It could feel like now the rich people have gotten in the programme and
they’re pulling up the ladder behind them. It’s an interesting perspective. Amanda? I think for me it raises the question of what is the change that
we’re seeking and what is the role of the bar? So if the idea is to bring
more fisheries globally into the programme in a way that enables
continuous improvement that is one critical and important area of work. The
other part of it is how do you maintain a standard that actually pulls
improvement behind it regardless of whether or not X number of fisheries
actually reach certification? And to me that is the existing tension. What is
the change that is being sought? Rupert talked about the need for range of
programme opportunities for participation for a range of fisheries at different
levels and in different styles of governance. And on the other hand a
certification implies the ability to control quality and demonstrate
governance at a certain level. And so I think the question I would have is how
do you cater to both of those sets of needs while not allowing the quality of
the certification to in any way diminish? And the reality is that with new
information and changing oceans we have to find a way to update the standard and
not allow that diminishment to occur. I absolutely agree. I think it does depend on the issues as well. And you have to bear in mind that the MSC has a
framework and underpinned by the FAOr framework which defines how
long the standard can take to implement changes to the minimum to allow the supply base to come in line with it. That’s obviously part of the GSSI
benchmarking. You have to be compliant with that. So if
you’re not GSSI benchmarked and trying to be compliant that’s a bad thing because
you’re trying to move things in the standard too quickly. I just come back to its about dialogue, engaging all stakeholders and talking through the issue and the challenges that exist so
we can deliver improvement and change in agreed but realistic timescales. From our side we’ve been working for
more than twenty years to get to a point where more than 90% of the portfolio is
certified today. So I think we’ve faced the two issues of making sure that our
existing suppliers evolve as the standard evolve and we do believe in evolvement. But also making sure that the suppliers that are not yet certified that we get
them on board. So very similar to what’s already been said. Actually this whole
discussion demonstrates one of the critical tensions which is that while we
would all like to see and particularly from the NGO world – often people think
NGOs would really like to stay unhappy forever – but mostly we’d really like to
declare victory and go for cocktails. So you know we would
really like to sit back and say this has gone really well and we see great
improvements. But the challenge is. In order to actually create a bar that is at the
right level we have to be careful of not allowing anything to just sort of slide. And that means maintaining sometimes that hard line. And so well I think
dialogue is important, I also think the creative tension between how fast can we
get it done in order to meet biological or ecological imperatives versus the
tension of well it would be easier if we slowed it down or we have all of these
other things we have to take into account. That is a fundamental tension
that’s going to continue to exist. But I think what we have to do is not make
it about whether it’s an NGO or an industry issue and recognise that the
practical realities are we have an ocean that is still degrading and we want to
address that. That’s quite an interesting idea that this tension is actually a
good thing and a necessary thing rather than something to worry about and
be concerned by. It has to be managed of course and the dialogue process is the
key to that. As you think about what the success of the MSC so far and its
approach, what reflections do you have on how the organisation might think about
evolving to improve on what’s already something that a lot of efforts gone
into? Well I think the MSC to a certain degree is a victim of its own success. The criticism that the organisation is facing today it could
have been predicted back in 1997 that that would have occurred. It’s
only natural that an organisation that seeks to
reward the top say 20 percent performers and then bring the rest up to that level
over time will at some point when it gets to around 15% come under criticism.
For the last 15 years, the most celebrated fisheries in the world in the
first place have become certified. And now the ones
that are more borderline cases are coming through. Some straight above, some may be slightly below the bar and maybe even shouldn’t have gone through as well. And so this is something that could have been expected all the time.
But now it’s also the point where we may be realising that there is actually
a fundamental difference in philosophy in the MSC theory of change
and how other NGOs pursue sustainability. And the whole MSC theory is
at the very slow macro global level and it’s not something that takes four years
or five years or ten years it takes decades. But it’s what can I believe you
know as an actual believer in the programme it can facilitate true change at a much
much larger scale. And I think were just coming to realise that fundamental difference and it’s a way of change that is much
harder to sell as well. It’s not as populistic as the single case issues. So given where the MSC is sitting now does it get ghettoized in that 20%?
Where’s its relationship with the other 80%? What does that look like? What does that connection look like? That seems to me to be a fundamental question. The relationship between the MSC in the fisheries improvement project world that
you you alluded to Ally. I mean how do you see that nexus evolving?
Obviously in the UK, the MSC are intimately involved in that process. I
think there is a link there. I don’t think the MSC should
necessarily drive that going forward. I think they provide that framework and that’s a recognised framework. I think that there isn’t necessarily a right or wrong answer to this. What there is is a need for clarification and an understanding. And potentially a renovation or remodelling. In the sense that at the time
the MSC came into play it set the bar. And it enabled people to understand what
the bar was and that there was a process towards moving towards it and create
that incentive and process of reward. At this stage I think that there is
sometimes a misunderstanding about what the MSC is trying to do. Is it still
setting a bar and this is where you see some and I can’t speak for every NGO but
I can say that this is where you observed that some NGOs appear unhappy
with where the bar is, right. Is the bar meant to be way way way up here and
still just holding for that top 10-15%? Or is it meant to be static or
more stable and allow more and more fisheries to become certified? Is the aim
to only certify at the top of the top? Or is it to enable any fishery to
enter a pathway that means it will become acceptable? And unless those
differences are clarified so we can say this is actually what the MSC is doing
at this point in time, this is its value proposition in the marketplace. Unless we
answer that question it’s very difficult to create a pathway going forward. Fundamentally, I think we’ve just got to remember that we’re setting this against the context of the context of the SDGs. And if
we deliver that: SDG14.4 that’d be a great place to be to end IUU and overfishing. However, the MSC, and we all need to be
adaptive to new information that comes and I think that the new evidence
the new science should be the fundamentals that drive the change in the standard. Well we have to recognise the MSC can’t be all things to all people which I believe one of the earlier speakers said. And that it also
can’t be the primary delivery point for the SDGs. So it’s defining what that
role is and recognising that like any institution or business we’ve defined
the pathway in which we can best deliver and move with that. What I heard you say
Amanda there I think is that there’s there’s a job to do in clarifying the
kind of fundamental belief in the purpose of the organisation and this
idea: are we or is the MSC about defining north and holding
that precious? Is that it’s fundamental belief that that’s its role? Or is its
role to say you know if we want to affect large-scale change across the
globe perfection is the enemy of the good yes we need to define north not get
too precious about that and find ways to bring as many people as close as
possible to that recognising that it’s going to be a messy process? And it’s
about clarifying which of those is the key belief and purpose? Is that what
you’re saying? Yes, and in fact then if it’s both let’s point out where the line
is drawn and where different activities achieve different things. And maybe think about different organisational arrangements for those two things. And bring some balance in to that arrangement. Exactly, yes. And I think it does that to be honest with you. To be honest if we take a step back I think it does that. What’s going to in my view what’s going to affect the biggest change. What’s going to make the biggest difference globally. So that
should really defining that balance. And I think that bringing everyone along is
probably 80% or maybe even 90%. Let’s ask Rupert and Nicolas to
join us and open up for some questions from the audience and from our online guests as well. Plenty to chew on there gentlemen. And any reflections
from the audience also are most welcome. It’s actually a little bit difficult
to see. Is there anybody in the audience who would like to pose a question to our
panel? Yes sir. Oh hello Peter. I recognise some faces as it comes. Morning panel this is Peter Hajipieris. This is a question to Rupert and the MSC
organisation. Rupert, yourself you alluded at the beginning that some of the
certifications were withdrawn because of climate change, yeah. And there’s a recognition that in all of us that have been working in
sustainability you know the journey’s a persistent one
and we’re always becoming more sustainable. Don’t you think it’s about
time that the MSC grasps the moment to recalibrate itself and actually correct
the claim and make it so that it’s responsibly managed fisheries that you
certify not sustainable. That will take away a part of the problem the MSC does which gets itself inside the bees and hornets nest on the claim. If you look at all the other GSSI claims and all the other certifications they
certify responsibility. So I think that’s a really good area for the MSC to focus on. Peter. Thank you for a nice easy first
question. The MSC claim: ‘certified sustainable
seafood’. It’s a really good question. That is the MSC claim. It’s gained
traction in the marketplace. As Nicolas said there’s nearly 30,000 individual
products in a market worth maybe six billion dollars. The market wants
traceable, certified, sustainable seafood. It’s hard to make up an answer to
that one concretely on the fly. But it’s been raised several times. When I first
joined MSC in 2004 there was a question about the claim. Is MSC
over-promising and under-delivering? And to some of the comments from the panel about the sort of evolving nature and understanding of sustainability, maybe
that question should be reflected upon and revisited. It’s clear that people’s
expectations of what constitutes sustainability has moved beyond
ecological sustainability to encompass obviously the social dimension which
Nicolas has said we’re beginning to look at. And other programs are trying to
develop a real social standard for at sea vessels. And obviously the economic
dimension. So my last comment on that is if MSC did change its claim back to
the original strapline: ‘best environmental choice’ it would be great to know whether the totality of the conservation and NGO community would
then get behind the MSC. That’d be an interesting second question. Any other responses from the panel? I don’t
think that we could I don’t think that if you went into the Australasian
College of Physicians and asked them in totality to agree on a treatment choice
that they would. So I don’t think it’s about the totality of the NGO world
agreeing to it. I think it’s about making sure that there is as clear an
understanding as possible about the value proposition about what it delivers. And that’s really what the question about sustainable is. Any other questions
from the audience? Yes the lady at the back. Hi there everyone. My name is Vivian. It’s more of a personal question. But I really related to what Amanda was talking about
earlier with kind of striking this balance about kind of how we define what
the MSC does. But I was just kind of wondering I think there are some
fisheries in the world that kind of are quite clearly very unsustainable. And I
was wondering if someone from the MSC can kind of clarify for me what the
justification is for the Orange Roughy deep-sea fishery? Because that’s one that
I sort of personally feel is quite sort of clearly quite unsustainable. So I just
wanted some feedback from an MSC member of staff on that. I think we need to keep
this one quite brief but Rupert let me ask you to respond. I’ll keep it brief. That fishery has gone through an independent science evidence-based
certification assessment by independent scientists. Been through peer review, been through objections. It has met the standard. That fishery is sustainable
according to our standard. And we could have a longer conversation as to why you
don’t think it’s sustainable. But through that process it has met the MSC bar and
we celebrate is as a sustainable fishery. But happily carry on the conversation on
this one at the break. Any other questions? Yes Jose.
Just throw it. I don’t think so. [laughter]. I’m curious Rupert, Nicolas. If as you consider leveraging the standards for social
impacts: modern-day slavery that are already out there or being delivered. Will you be consistent with the multi-stakeholder approach? In other
words, will you consider holding that as one of the main main criteria not to
erode the original genesis of MSC in its multi-stakeholder platform? I would be
really concerned if there was a movement to adopt or adapt with someone that
already exists or is being delivered that wasn’t created with the same
integrity and inclusiveness that the MSC started with. So apologies to the panel. Do you want to take that Nicolas? Yeah i’ll take that one because maybe it was not clear in in my speech but we are actually actively consulting now. And also the way
forward will be actually for fisheries to recognise by 2020 existing social
standards that that are credible rather than MSC developing its own
social criteria as part of its standard. So to become eligible, the likelihood,
because we’re still in consultation. But one of the solutions we are offering
is that to become eligible to MSC, if you are in a higher-risk situation you
should be certified to an existing recognised social standard for
fisheries. And it’s the same for the supply chain. In the meantime we have a
system of self declarations because we want to understand the situation within
those fisheries. And we are also actively consulting now with valued stakeholders to
define what that declaration will be. But it is not really
in MSC’s expertise. We don’t run a strong expertise on social. So actually in the
spirit of your question, we’d rather work with experts in the social certification, social standard and we will collaborate with those if they
exist by 2020. For fisheries I mean. Are there any questions for the panel? Ray. If you look to the real threats to the ocean from fisheries, they’re not coming from the fisheries that are MSC certified or even those that are close. It’s that other, the bottom 60%. So is the MSC irrelevant to solving those problems? And so I’m just interested in everyone’s view of what we’re dealing with. You know
sixty percent of world’s fish production is never going to certainly not in decades
going to come close to the MSC standard. So, do we need some other organisation or
some way of solving those problems? Wish I’d thought of that one. [Laughter] Amanda. So a couple of points there. First is, I don’t think that it’s MSC’s job to solve the entire problem. So just on that
basis alone it’s absolutely not irrelevant. Secondly, I think that since
the inception of the MSC we’ve seen the process of setting the standard and
assessing against it has enabled dialogue, debate and testing of various
options around management and various ways forward with respect to what
constitutes sustainability. And that in itself has moved the entire bar forward
globally. And that comes back initially to the initial question about what
constitutes success with the theory of change. Paraphrasing, but that’s the idea.
I do think that yes there are a whole series of fisheries that are not going
to ever come close to or have a desire to enter what is currently
available to them. And the bigger question there is, what else do we need
to do in that space to create a situation of improvement? Because the MSC is not just here to solve that entire problem and I would hope that governments and
fishery managers and others would see opportunities to continue to work on
that. You came in front of me there. That organisation is called governments and to a certain degree they and the UN. And I think that that is they haven’t
solved the entire problem so far but I think also to a degree with the way industry has more ownership of sustainability and is now to a certain degree lobbying government to move quicker in sustainable fisheries management. I’m
quite optimistic about the long-term future. Yes sir. I’m Julio Moron from OPAGAC in Spain and it’s just a question to Ally. How comfortable are your consumers be with the social approach that MSC is taking compared with ASC or FSC that they compile and they comprise principles or some principles like what is the perception that you might have
from their market? Specifically under the MSC? The approach that MSC is
taking on the social aspects. I think Nicolas has touched on that and my
personal view is that’s a start point. Its basic. But where I believe
there’s a dialogue taking place about the internationalisation of the
responsible fishing scheme and how that can achieve global outreach. My personal
view is that is the way that the MSC ultimately should deal with this
and layer it in to the MSC standard. But it’s very early days within that process
and there’s still a lot of dialogue to be had in that space. That’s the way I
directionally I think this should go. I’d like to ask I’d like to ask Rupert
if he has any questions from the panel or any reflections on what he heard from
the discussion. I have a multitude of reflections and many questions and I’m
tempted to ask the doors to be shut and keep you all in here for an hour. But
well a couple of them I think you know one theme is you know MSC’s in a tough
place. That’s the structure of the organisation. We have a multi-stakeholder
model. There are very different expectations of where the programme should go. What it should include. Is it a sustainability standard? Should it
encompass a more social element? What’s its role with the Global South? Data poor, developing world, community-based fisheries? We have a
vision and our vision is of healthy productive oceans and seafood supplies
safeguarded for future generations this and future generations. We do believe and
we we have a 20-year track record that the theory of change is working. We have
more fisheries coming in. It does create the incentives to bring more fisheries
in into improvement programmes and many on a voluntary basis because we are a
voluntary programme ultimately seek MSC certification. Unashamedly, we want to see
global fisheries and it is a project of decades operating at a
sustainable level not necessarily MSC certified. It’s up to them whether
there’s the business case and the value proposition to seek third party
recognition. But that’s the level of performance we need to see for the SDGs. We’re very clear on our strategic plan the 20% engagement by 2020 30%
aspirational target by 2030. And to get there we’re going to have to work much
more effectively with all of you, civil society, business and governments to
create the right enabling framework for these fisheries to move forward. So yes
there’s things to define you know what are we going to do with
our in transition to MSC programme? What are we going to do with the social? You
know, the board has instructed us to work with other standards developers who are
trying to develop applicable social standards. That’s how we want to work in
partnership. But in the meantime we’re having this disclosure for supply
chain and fisheries. And we may require third party audits by 2020. It is a very
dynamic, fluid time and things are changing. But I do have a question for the panel sorry. My question for the panel and for the
market people just to put them on alert. Peter’s opening question about the claim. What does the market feel about a sustainability claim and then maybe a
different claim after 20 years back to the ‘best environmental choice’?
It’s a really good question. I think awareness is still going to be
the key thing and I think awareness is going up. So I think we first of
all need to make sure that consumers are aware that there is a sustainable claim. And then I think that the more simple we keep it the better. So if there
is a change in what it means, that has to be simplified so that consumers
can understand it. So we can’t keep confusing them. And then I think it’s
asking a bit too much to ask that the consuer understands the difference between
responsible and sustainable today. I don’t think they’re there yet. You make the point very well. I’d rather put my effort into the
improvement programme and actually delivering the desired outcome than
spending too much time on the debate on the wording. But you know there are
inevitable questions if you’re dropping sustainability if it’s not sustainable,
is it unsustainable? And do we need to get into that debate at the end of the day. Shouldn’t we just concentrate on delivering the vision? We’ve got a question from our online audience here that relates to again to this role of MSC in the developing world. My tablet
has decided not to be responsive but it’s from Chris Carson in South Africa
asking what do the panel feel about the role of the MSC? It relates a little bit
to Ray’s question for the developing world in particular and small-scale fisheries in the developing world. Do you see a role at all in that
in that domain? Well small-scale fisheries in general, the
MSC value proposition can be lower even in my country but and also due to the fact that often in the developing world that
the products go to local markets and it will be very hard to leverage the same
level of consumer demand for MSC certified products. But the improvement
projects. And if you focus on more on the standard as as a tool rather, as a management tool rather than as a market recognition
tool, I think that could be the way to go. But this may
be one of the areas where MSC is at best part of the solution and maybe not
the best solution. Any more questions from the audience? I think we’ve got time for one more. Yes, the lady there. Hi, just building on a couple of points that
people have made. Do you think this the way that the MSC can be more
transparent in terms of the actual standard itself? It’s quite complex
and quite rightly so. But is there a way that best practice scenarios can be made
kind of more publicly available and transparent to allow that to be used as an empowerment tool so more people can access the standard, understand it
and then use it? Not necessarily to be certified or as a market tool but to
improve these fisheries we talked about that aren’t necessarily going to engage
fully with the programme? Hope that makes sense. Is that directed at me, I guess? Okay, I’ll go last. I’d just like to clarify that we are actually starting to do this as part of a new strategic plan and as one of the
slide I presented, we have those projects where we are you know looking
at multi fishery pre-assessment project and I think by transparency, you
probably mean more simplicity because and that’s. It is a major challenge and
you’re right to point out and that’s something we still need to get better at making
our programme much more understandable and simpler to explain. But
we invest. We have my colleague Oluyemisi Oloruntuyi is probably here. She’s leading our developing world engagement. And so we have a vast programme of capacity building. So there are fishery improvement providers all around the
world we are working with. And we you know we spend time with them, their constituent
of the fisheries they’re working with to explain what the standard is. But it takes
usually several days of workshops to do that. It is complex. It is a complex issue
and for us what’s complex is how you make something complex much more
simpler. We can still improve on that but it’s difficult. Thank you. We’re at half past [10]. I know people have other commitments and I think we need to honour those and your time. Thank you very much for your attendance. Thank you in particular to our panel for stepping up and offering their reflections. I hope you found the discussion
stimulating. I hope we managed to achieve the balance that we talked about and
aspired to. Rupert and Nicolas have said they were happy to stay and answer any
other questions that people might have of a more detailed nature. Thank you to
our online audience as well and we hope that you’ve had a stimulating and
valuable couple of hours. Thank you.

One thought on “MSC Seafood Futures Forum 2018 | Seafood Expo Global, Brussels

  1. Language like "standards were satisfied". Well who's standards? Do you have the scientific study on your website? Im only skeptical of corporations being the stewards of sustainability.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *