Societal interest in sustainably managed wild capture fisheries has increased over the last 20 years as a consequence of growing concern regarding the finite limits of the Earth’s ability to feed an increasing human population and recognition that valuable renewable food resources, such as marine fisheries, can be depleted through over-harvesting and inadequate management. Governments and regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs) are increasingly emphasizing sustainable fisheries management in policy documents, but effective implementation of these policies is often lagging. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization reports that 30% of the world’s fisheries are now over-exploited or depleted.

This widespread failure of traditional governance structures to successfully implement sustainable fisheries management policy has created a niche for environmental non governmental organizations (ENGOs) and other non-profit groups to play a significant role. They have become increasingly active in drawing public attention to unsustainable fishing practices around the world and bringing pressure to bear on governments and RFMOs to implement more conservation-minded and sustainable measures. More recently these campaigns have broadened to include a focus on producers, retailers and consumers through processes such as eco-certification, eco-labeling, endorsement and ranking of sustainably managed fisheries and products derived from these fisheries.

These various groups have similar goals, but the mechanisms for achieving sustainable fisheries are very different. Governments and RFMOs work through a political process to achieve the best compromise between exploitation and conservation whereas the ENGOs and non-profit groups directly targets human values with regard to what is good and what is not through social conscience and the market place.

The potential exists for redundancy, with society paying twice, once for a belt and once for braces, to ensure that the sustainability trousers stay up. If governments and RFMOs are already meeting sustainability objectives, why do harvesters and processors have to pay the potentially high cost (eventually passed onto the consumer/taxpayer) of getting a second seal of approval to convince the resource owners (civil public) that all is well with their property and that the leaseholders (fishing industry) are living up to their legal obligations?

A publicly funded system for sustainable fisheries, governed by legislation, regulations, conventions and codes of conduct may seem to be the most logical approach to managing public property for long-term public good. The reasonable role for ENGOs and non-profit groups would be the traditional one of carping and criticism to keep the traditional fisheries management bodies honest, rather than trying to do the job themselves. However, the poor performance and lack of transparency of some governments and RFMOs has resulted in deterioration in public trust and created the opportunity for synergy. 

Eco-certification has the potential to improve industry market share and revenue streams making sustainable management more profitable in the short-term.  It is also raising the awareness of society to the need to consider more carefully what fish we eat and whether or not it comes from a sustainably managed fishery.  Eco-certification may therefore create a more positive climate for governments and RFMOs to move forward on the implementation of stalled sustainable fisheries management policies.

There is no question that sustainable fisheries are of paramount importance to all concerned. Both traditional forms of fisheries governance and the new and emerging process of eco-certification, eco-labeling and ranking can facilitate the achievement of sustainable fisheries. The question is, do we need both? For the time being we have to argue “yes”. Traditional measures have been slow to deal with the enormity of the problem of overfishing. There is redundancy in ENGOs and non-profit groups second guessing governments and RFMOs on sustainability, but it is the synergistic side of the equation that needs to be emphasised. Yes, we need belt and braces to keep the sustainability trousers up, at least for the time being.