Market mechanisms for fisheries improvement
Jim Cannon
CEO, Sustainable Fisheries Partnership (SFP)
Presenting to
RFE Salmon Meeting
Portland, Oregon
November 2007
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership
SFP status and partners
• Status: NGO founded 2006 (US 501c3 status)
• Funding: foundations, corporate partners
• Advise: McDonald's, Wal-Mart, Young's Seafood, Espersen and other buyers, suppliers, catchers, and farmers.
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership
SFP Mission and Purpose
• Mission: “to maintain healthy ocean and aquatic ecosystems, enhance fishing and fish-farming livelihoods and secure food supplies”
• Purpose: “improve access to information to guide responsible seafood sourcing, and enhance the ability of seafood companies and partners to improve fish-farming and capture fisheries”
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership
SFP ProgramsSustainable Fisheries Partnership
• Staff: 20, with expertise in fisheries management, fish farming and environmental protection
• Locations: US, EU, Australia, Indonesia, Mexico, Philippines, Russia, Chile, Argentina
• Programs:– Information provision: FishSource.org– Fishery Improvement Partnerships (FIPs)– Aquaculture Improvement Partnerships (AIPs)– Advice to major seafood buyers and suppliers
Presentation OverviewSustainable Fisheries Partnership
• Mechanisms for change
• Fisheries Improvement Partnerships (FIPs) overview
• Russian pollock FIP overview
• Key lessons learned
Mechanisms for ChangeSustainable Fisheries Partnership
Goal: improve the fishery: Change policies
1 Direct lobbying/engaging officials/politicians
2 Public awareness campaigns (range in tone, e.g., activist, academic, aquarium)
3 Lawsuits
4 Engage companies to get them to exert pressure (range in tone, from activist to e.g., SFP Fisheries Improvement Partnerships)
5 Consumer demand-based models – eco-labels, cards etc. Change private practices
1 Lawsuits
2 Engage companies to get them to demand change (range in tone, from activist to e.g., SFP Fisheries Improvement Partnerships)
3 Consumer demand-based models – eco-labels, cards etc.
Market MechanismsSustainable Fisheries Partnership
• Consumer-demand based e.g., eco-labels (MSC), seafood cards
• Engaging companies– Distinguish retailers from “consumer facing
brands” from suppliers from producers– Various “activist” approaches– SFP's Fisheries Improvement Partnerships
FIPs overviewSustainable Fisheries Partnership
• prepare fishery profile on FishSource• optional: carry out MSC pre-assessment
best way to determine what is needed for MSC label Initiates work with best long-term way to meet key
retailer/market demands
• if problems need to be fixed, partner with SFP to run a FIP
• agree on action plan to fix the problems, and identify annual improvement milestones
• deliver on improvement milestones• partner with SFP to report progress to retailers
Wal-Mart Initiative
• source only from MSC certified fisheries by 2009-11
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership
Russian pollockSustainable Fisheries Partnership
Western pollock resource
Gulf of Olyutorski
(East Kamchatka Fishing Zone)
2 – Karaginsk
3 – Petropavlovsk - Kommandor
Sea of Okhotsk pollock resource
(Sea of Okhotsk Fishing Zone)
4 – North Okhotsk
5 – West Kamchatka
6 – Kamchatka – Kuril
7 – East Sakhalin
Northern pollock resource
Cape Navarin
(Western Bering Sea Fishing Zone)
1 – West Bering Sea
Russian pollockSustainable Fisheries Partnership
Russian Pollock:Northern, Western and Okhotsk Resources
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
'00
0t
TAC Catch
Russian pollockSustainable Fisheries Partnership
• Catches down ~ 70% in last ten years• Three main resources: “Northern West Bering”
(Navarin), “Western West” (Olyutorski) and the Sea of Okhotsk
• Okhotsk: biomass down 70% from mid-90s levels• Northern: older official assessments showed biomass
had declined during the late 1990s / early 2000s by up to 50% from a low base. Recent assessments estimate the biomass has increased.
• Western: biomass very low. No direct fishery (by-catch quota only)
• Significant illegal fishing and smuggling reported• Drastic declines in Steller Sea Lion
Russian pollock timeline 1Sustainable Fisheries Partnership
• April 2006 – “SFP” chairs Brussels meeting– Wal-Mart, McDonald's, Unilever (Birdseye), Royal Greenland, FroSTA
– BAMR, Pacific Andes
– 4 recommendations: (1) form association to represent interests; (2) lobby for improvements; (3) verify legality; (4) seek MSC pre-assessment
• May 2006 – Russian companies met to discussion recommendations
• August 2006 – Pollock Catchers Association forms– to protect fish resources and their habitat, to recommend Russian
government and management on improving the fishery, etc.
Russian pollock timeline 2Sustainable Fisheries Partnership
• August 2006 – SFP/WWF meetings with key companies at IFC, Vladivostok
• December 2006 / January 2007 – Pollock Catcher Association considers MSC pre-assessment. SFP/WWF present case.
• March 2007 – contract signed with certifier
• April 2007 – SFP hosts 2nd FIP meeting with buyers and producers at Brussels show
– Much more positive tone, dialog both ways, with Russian company leading debate
Russian pollock timeline 3Sustainable Fisheries Partnership
• June – August 2007 – PCA – MSC CB meetings
• September 2007 – SFP presents at 2nd International Fishery Congress
• PCA announced: 4.5% roe recovery, A and B seasons
• Legal verification pilot project developed
• Discussion of Russian company being lead corporate partner in FIP
Russian pollock FIP lessonsSustainable Fisheries Partnership
• Progress relies on becoming seen as a trusted “insider”
• Gaining trust and getting productive dialog takes a lot of time
• Be well informed:
– Recognise and understand different approaches but high quality of Russian fisheries/marine science
– Understand laws, enforcement systems, recognise known problems etc.
• Partnership needed between companies through the supply chain
– Build leverage through market share represented, but only helps with getting attention of producers
• Leadership by local senior company staff is essential (“ambassadors to TINRO, government etc.”)
• Committed staff in leading companies also essential (competing priorities, capacity limitations, avoid “lost in translation” problems)
• Pace of change externally limited
Top Related