seafood stewardship index...the seafood stewardship index will primarily rely on data provided by...

Jakarta, 13 & 14 December 2016

Seafood StewardShip index Report of the first Stakeholder Roundtable

Stakeholders’ perspectiveson seafood stewardship

and the role of the seafood industry

Index Initiative - Seafood Stewardship Index

On behalf of Index Initiative, please contact Gerbrand Haverkamp (Index Leader)

+31 6 45 78 85 80 [email protected]

index initiativeWeWork MetropoolWeesperstraat 611018 VN AmsterdamThe Netherlands

www.indexinitiative.org +31 6 45 78 85 80 [email protected]

Stakeholders’ perspectiveson seafood stewardship and the role of the seafood industry

Seafood StewardShip indexReport of the first Stakeholder Roundtable

Jakarta, 13 & 14 December 2016


introduction

Background

introductory queStionS and diScuSSionS

dimenSionS of StewardShip

iSSueS, actionS and meaSureS the index Should cover

exiSting frameworkS, conventionS, guidelineS and StandardS

the uSe of third-party data

follow-up and next StepS

liSt of participantS

003

006

007

009

011

019

021

022

023

004

content

Index Initiative - Seafood Stewardship IndexINTRODucTION

introduction

On December 13 and 14 Index Initiative organized the first Seafood Stewardship Index roundtable in Jakarta to consult stakeholders on input for the methodology of the Index. Representatives of international seafood companies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), governments, academic institutions and independent experts participated in this roundtable. The event was co-hosted by the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands to Indonesia in Jakarta.

This event concluded a one year period of research and stakeholder consultations carried out by Index Initiative with support of the Dutch government, to assess the feasibility of developing a Seafood Stewardship Index. This Index will rank the world’s largest 30 seafood companies on their policies, commitments and performance in delivering sustainable seafood. It will show what seafood companies can do and what they are actually doing to improve responsibility and sustainability in seafood supply chains. It will give credit to companies that show strong performance while it puts pressure on companies that underperform. By highlighting best practices, the Index will stimulate learning and will accelerate the uptake of best practices throughout the industry.

The aim of this stakeholder roundtable was threefold: (1) to discuss and identify what stewardship entails for the seafood industry, (2) to identify stewardship issues the Index should cover and (3) to identify what different stakeholders expect from leading seafood companies.

On the first day, Index Initiative presented the outcomes of its feasibility study to the participants. This was followed by a discussion on what stewardship entails for the seafood industry and the different dimensions of stewardship. Furthermore, participants discussed which issues the Seafood Stewardship Index should cover. The second day focused on how the Seafood Stewardship Index can build on existing frameworks and standards and how Index Initiative can use existing third-party data to supplement its research. The roundtable was concluded with a discussion on what meaningful actions

004004

Index Initiative - Seafood Stewardship IndexINTRODucTION

and measures seafood companies can take to enhance sustainability and responsibility within seafood supply chains. This report summarizes the main discussions and outcomes of this two-day roundtable.

The roundtable was chaired by Jacqui Dixon, an expert in corporate social responsibility in the seafood sector. In her previous role she established and led a sustainability team for the seafood company Pacific Andes and was co-chair of the Asia Pacific Economic cooperation (APEc) Working Group Sustainable Development of Agricultural and Fishery Sector under the APEc Policy Partnership on Food Security (PPFS).

005005

Index Initiative - Seafood Stewardship IndexBAcKGROuND

Background

In September 2015, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and corresponding goals (SDGs) and targets have been adopted by all 193 uN Member States. Success of the Agenda 2030 requires implementation by governments but they are unlikely to succeed without broad societal participation and engagement of the private sector. With increasing globalization, companies are now, more than ever, able to deliver a unique and significant contribution to the achievement of the SDGs.

The contribution of the private sector to the SDGs will differ from industry to industry. This creates the need to go beyond the term private sector and to move to an approach that is more industry and company specific. By formulating clear expectations for each industry that align with their core business, contribution to the SDGs and progress can be monitored, allowing society to hold companies accountable.

Index Initiative’s landscape study Unraveling the Role of the Private Sector identified that the seafood industry is uniquely positioned to contribute to achieving SDG 2 (zero hunger) and 14 (life below water) and can make further positive contributions to SDG 1 (no poverty), SDG 5 (gender equality), SDG 8 (decent work and economic growth), SDG 12 (responsible consumption and production) and SDG 15 (life on land). The subsequent feasibility study concluded there was a strong case for developing the Seafood Stewardship Index.

aBout index initiative

Index Initiative is a non-profit organization based in Amsterdam that develops indices that encourage and inspire companies to contribute to positive change. Through an extensive multi-stakeholder process, an index helps to clarify and reach consensus on societal expectations from leading industries in terms of their contribution to achieving the SDGs. The subsequent measurement pro-cess reveals to what extent individual seafood companies actually meet these expectations.

By comparing companies to each other, an index rewards good practice and pro-vides a transparent and impartial means by which companies and stakeholders can monitor performance. By identifying best practices and areas for improve-ment an index encourages companies to do more and spurs advancements in areas most needed. Indices have proven to be useful tools for e.g. investors, banks, governments, multilateral organizations, NGOs, academia and buyers.

006006

Index Initiative - Seafood Stewardship IndexINTRODucTORY QuESTIONS AND DIScuSSIONS

introductory queStionS and diScuSSionS

The roundtable started with a presentation by Index Initiative on the overall proposed idea of an index, the Index scope and Index development process. This presentation was followed by questions and a discussion on the basic principles underling the development of the Seafood Stewardship Index. The questions and issues raised evolved around five topics:

propoSed index Scope and limitationSIndex Initiative proposes to select companies on the basis of revenue and sufficient peer recognition by only including companies that both source and sell on the global market. Participants pointed out that although this scope includes the largest global seafood companies, it leaves out many others. For example, due to the inclusion criteria applied, feed companies are excluded as well as companies that do not make the revenue threshold. Index Initiative acknowledges the limitations of its current scope but will accept these for the first Index. Developing for example sub-indices that either focus on specific regions (e.g. Southeast Asia) or industry segments (fish feed) will be considered after the first global Index has been published and evaluated.

data included in company aSSeSSmentSThe Seafood Stewardship Index will primarily rely on data provided by the companies in scope. Third-party data will be used for data verification and can provide the context for assessment. Participants pointed out that transparency in the industry is low which limits the ability to properly assess companies. Therefore, companies should be given the opportunity to disclose additional data to Index Initiative that can be incorporated into their assessments. Index Initiative offers this opportunity by sending companies questionnaires. These are prepopulated with information that companies publicly disclose for example in annual reports or on their websites.

uSe of the index By StakeholderS and companieSParticipants asked how companies and stakeholders use existing indices such as the Access to Medicine Index and the Access to Seeds Index. In both cases stakeholders like financial institutions, governments and civil society organizations use the indices in their engagement and to build partnerships with companies. companies themselves use the indices both internally (e.g. strategy development and internal communication) as well as externally to communicate the commitment of the company to sustainable development. Index Initiative identified governments, banks, investors, academia, civil society and seafood buyers as potential users of the Seafood Stewardship Index. Participants also stressed that the Index can be used as a platform to build under-standing and trust among seafood stakeholders. This could stimulate cooperation among industry and stakeholders groups in tackling complex issues that go beyond the responsibility of individual companies.

1

2

3

007007

Index Initiative - Seafood Stewardship IndexINTRODucTORY QuESTIONS AND DIScuSSIONS

methodology development proceSSParticipants stressed that the methodology development process should be inclusive for all stakeholders and that it should make the best possible use of existing frame-works, conventions and standards. Index Initiative fully endorses this advice. The use of existing frameworks, conventions and standards was discussed in a dedicated session on day two. In addition, Index Initiative will establish an Expert Review committee that will oversee the development of the methodology. Experts from different stakeholder groups will be invited to join this committee.

focuS on contriButionParticipants echoed the importance of focusing on what companies are able to do and how they are contributing, rather than on identifying malpractices and naming and shaming. For example, a company that operates in a supply chain that is at risk of labor and human rights violations but actively works to improve the situation should be given credit in the Index rather than discredit them for operating in high risk environments.

4

5

key takeawayS

• Offer companies the opportunity to provide additional data rather than only using publicly available data.

• Think about how the Index can serve as a platform for building trust and understanding among stakeholders.

• Ensure that the methodology development process is inclusive for all stakeholders.

• Give credit to companies that actively use their position and leverage to make improvements throughout seafood supply chains.

008008

Index Initiative - Seafood Stewardship IndexDIMENSIONS OF STEWARDSHIP

dimenSionS of StewardShip

In its feasibility study Index Initiative used ISO 26000 as a starting point to identify relevant dimensions of stewardship for the seafood industry. ISO 26000 is an international guideline that organizations can use to incorporate social responsibility in their (business) practices. unlike other ISO standards, ISO 26000 does not contain requirements and cannot be used for certification. ISO 26000 formulates seven core subjects and companies are encouraged to evaluate their actions to identify current practices and potential improvements. The seven core subjects include human rights, labor practices, the environment, fair operating practices, consumer issues, community involvement and development and organizational governance. Following extensive research and stakeholder consultations, Index Initiative identified all but ‘ consumer issues’ as relevant dimensions of stewardship in its feasibility study. Roundtable participants were asked to comment on what they feel stewardship entails for the seafood industry and to identify relevant dimensions of stewardship.

009009

holiStic approach

interdependence

organiZation

human rightS

laBorpracticeS

theenvironment

fair operatingpracticeS

conSumeriSSueS

community involvement

and development

organiZational

governance

iSo 26000 core

SuBjectS

figure 1

Index Initiative - Seafood Stewardship IndexDIMENSIONS OF STEWARDSHIP

Participants underlined that ISO 26000 provides a useful and valuable point of reference. Although consumers issues such as food safety and labeling are highly important issues in the seafood industry, it was stressed that these are covered extensively by international as well as national regulation. In addition, as food safety is already a key priority for seafood companies, buyers and consumers, participants felt including this in the Seafood Stewardship Index would not bring significant value nor improvements in this area. Participants therefore supported the exclusion of con-sumer issues from the scope of the Seafood Stewardship Index.

community involvement and development is still a rather novel concept in the industry, particularly for the wild-catch sector. Participants emphasized that more work needs to be done to determine what can reasonably be expected from seafood companies in this regard. It was pointed out that, in order to be fair, the Index should focus on issues that seafood companies can actually control. In addition it was suggested to change the term ‘community involvement and development’ and ‘environment’, both formally used by ISO26000 into community engagement and ecosystems as they are more relevant to the seafood context.

The discussion also focused on whether responsible sourcing should be included as a separate dimension of stewardship due to its impact on both social and environmental sustainability in the industry. Seafood companies often buy from a wide variety of sources, including directly from vessels, or through aggregators, primary processors, traders, distributors, et cetera. Tracing seafood from its source (i.e. where it is caught or farmed) to consumption is crucial for seafood sustainability as it allows companies to identify and manage supply chain risks. Participants agreed that responsible sourcing is a crucial but cross-cutting issue for the industry. It was decided not to include responsible sourcing as a separate dimension as it will be a relevant topic under multiple dimensions such as ecosystems, labor practices, human rights and fair operating practices.

Lastly, participants stressed that the Index should remain responsive to new issues emerging. The awareness of labor issues was raised as an example of an issue that only emerged recently.

key takeawayS

• Exclude consumer issues such as labeling and food safety as the Index will add very little in this highly regulated domain.

• Take an explorative rather than prescriptive approach regarding issues around community engagement as there is a lack of consensus on the actual influence of companies in this area.

• Ensure a supply chain focus (versus only direct company operations) across all impact areas.

• The Index needs to remain responsive to new and emerging issues over time.

010010


iSSueS, actionS and meaSureS the index Should cover

The feasibility study identified a broad range of issues linked to the different dimensions of stewardship that should be covered by the Index. Issues range from, for example, migrant labor and Iuu fishing to feed conversion rates in aquaculture. Participants were asked to identify issues that should be addressed by this Index and indicate where they think global seafood companies are in the position to deliver the greatest contribution.

general iSSueS

Overall, participants indicated the im-portance of public reporting on com-mitments around environmental issues and challenges. Subsequently, regular reporting on progress regarding these commitments is also of importance. In addition, public disclosure of sourcing criteria is also a highly valued measure that companies can take. Furthermore, participants stressed the need to go be-yond what is legally required to enhance the environmental sustainability of aquaculture and wild-catch production systems. Ecosystem approachTraditional approaches tend to focus on a fishery’s impact on individual species without consideration of the interactions of fisheries with other fisheries or spe-cies. Participants emphasized that the Index should credit companies moving to an ecosystem approach, whereby interactions among species and the ecosystems in which they live are taken into account.

Contributing to innovation and participating in partnerships It was mentioned that participation of seafood companies in partnerships focused on improving the environmental sustainability of fishing and aquaculture activities is important. Examples mentioned include contributions to scientific research, participation in public private partnerships and platforms and support for RFMOs. The actions and measures around companies’ contributions to innovation and partnerships mentioned by participants are engaging in partnerships with environmental groups, the scientific community, local communities and governments. This also includes investing in R&D and innovation.

•

•

ISSuES, AcTIONS AND MEASuRES THE INDEX SHOuLD cOVER

environment

011

Index Initiative - Seafood Stewardship IndexISSuES, AcTIONS AND MEASuRES THE INDEX SHOuLD cOVER

Climate changeFisheries and therefore the industry is heavily impacted by the effects of climate change. The industry itself can take measures to reduce its own greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. An example that was given as an action companies can undertake in this area is applying carbon accounting measures to identify the main sources of GHG emissions and undertake efforts to reduce these.

Pollution and wastesParticipants identified several issues related to waste and pollution as relevant to the industry including the emissions of NOx and SOx, the use of P.E.T., the monitoring and disposal of garbage, oily water wastes and cFcs, HcFs and halons. Participants empha-sized the importance of waste reduction policies and enforcement of these policies.

wild catch iSSueS

Stock status and managementFor the wild catch sector, participants agreed that stock management is a key issue for the sector as “no fish means no business”. Effective and sustainable management depends on good scientific data, something which is often lacking. When it comes to actions and measures companies can take, participants stressed the importance of going beyond compliance in this area as quota or licenses often do not accurately reflect stock status and can be set well beyond sustainable levels. companies should actively refrain from harvesting or sourcing from fisheries that are threatened with extinction, overexploited and/or have a negative impact on wider marine ecosystems. If accurate stock data is lacking, companies can implement other measures such as minimum landing sizes and refrain from harvesting in spawning areas/specific seasons.

Building on and contributing to scientific researchThe lack of adequate information to determine the health of stocks is a big issue in the sector. For many fish stocks no assessments take place. According to roundtable participants, seafood companies should build on science-based approaches and tools to improve fisheries and aquaculture management. In addition, companies can actively invest in and contribute to collecting and sharing data in areas where (additional) information is required.

Fishing gears and methodsA wide variety of gear is used to land catches with every type having its own effects on marine ecosystems. Particular types of gear, such as bottom trawlers, can generate high levels of bycatch, both from the same species (juvenile fish or small target species) and other species. Participants emphasized that companies should put in place policies on destructive fishing methods (e.g. bottom trawling) and stimulate the development and use of (innovative) gear that minimizes environmental impacts and bycatch and that increases the survival rate of escaping fish.

•

•

•

•

•

012


aquaculture iSSueS

Site selection and carrying capacityAquaculture impacts the environment in various ways. Amongst others, the con-version of natural ecosystems to commercial use can negatively impact the services ecosystems can provide. For example, coastal aquaculture has contributed to the loss of mangroves through land use conversion. Effluents as a result of aquaculture can also impact local ecosystems. However, most aquaculture regulations focus on individual farm level, which is identified as an important issue by the roundtable participants. Having many producers in the same area can lead to cumulative environmental impacts. Spatial planning and zoning can ensure that aquaculture operations stay within the surrounding ecosystem’s carrying capacity. companies should use sustainable site selection as a preventive measure. Environmental impact assessments (EIAs) can be used by companies as a measure to assess the combination effect of aquaculture activities in one area, rather than assessing licenses on an individual basis. Participants emphasized that there should be a commitment to carry out these assessments and site audits.

Feed sourcingAs indicated by the participants, responsible feed sourcing for aquaculture is an important supply chain risk. Implementing a sustainable feed sourcing policy can mitigate this risk. Also, companies can take measures to ensure full traceability. Many new innovations in aquaculture are within the feedindustry. Investing in R&D and innovation related to sustainable feed sourcing practices are actions that should be rewarded by the Index.

Disease management and antibiotic useIntensive aquaculture farming increases the risk of disease outbreaks and transmissions which can wipe out entire stocks and can be transferred to wild populations if farming is not contained from the environment. Participants emphasized that companies should work towards reducing the use of antibiotics in aquaculture. In addition, proper disease management plans per site can prevent the outbreak and spread of diseases.

Participants discussed the need to explore what ‘community’ actually means. Does it only refer to direct suppliers and those around activities of seafood companies or is the context broader? Participants stressed that this should be fair and reasonable and should not overestimate the influence that companies actually have. Participants emphasized that this is a relevant but emerging area for seafood companies.

•

•

•

community engagement


013


Sharing resources and benefitsThe harvesting, production, processing and trade of seafood can be an important source of local employment. In addition, local fishing communities often heavily rely on local fishing grounds for their direct food and nutrition security. Roundtable participants identified the allocation of benefits of wild catch and aquaculture as an issue.Seafood companies can work to ensure that employment opportunities benefit local communities particularly in areas where global seafood companies make use of the same natural resources (land, water, fish stocks) as local communities. If community access to these resources is compromised due to large scale fishing operations this can become a source of conflict seafood companies should be mindful of. As national or international law and government requirements often lack in this area, companies are encouraged to develop companywide policies that address this issue, regardless of the country in which it operates. Dispute settlement Another issue participants identified is dispute settlement. Although conflicts over natural resources such as land, water and fish stocks should be prevented at all times, companies can actively contribute to conflict resolutions and provide access to effective remedy for victims.

Community engagement and capacity buildingActive community engagement to build long-term relationships and to improve the lives of communities surrounding company operations should be given credit in the Index according to participants. Working with local authorities and civil society to support local communities can also be rewarded. companies can contribute to building capacities by providing training and education, access to finance and other essential inputs for local communities and smallholder producers. Investing in value-adding activities such as processing and employing local communities for these activities can contribute to socioeconomic development. companies can develop and implement local community engagement strategies and develop tailored projects and solutions that contribute to building long-term sustainable relationships and trust.

Proactive transparency and communication Since community engagement and development is a new and emerging field for seafood companies, participants emphasized that proactive transparency should be credited. In addition, more extensive reporting on actions and measures related to community engagement in for example annual and/or cSR reports was considered valuable. Quantification and qualification of impact and outcomes in reporting should be highly valued by the Index.

Participants identified the following issues related to human rights and labor practices that could be addressed by the Index. Overall, participants indicated the importance of public reporting on commitments related to decent working conditions. Regular reporting on progress regarding these commitments is also of importance.

Recruitment practices and working agreements Participants indicated that issues exist around recruitment activities and working agreements. There is a general lack of transparency in the fishing industry on recruitment processes followed and the conditions of work set out in working agree-ments or in cases where working agreements do not exist, what has explicitly been communicated and agreed with seagoing personnel and workers about their rights

•

•

•

•

human rightS and laBor practiceS

•


014


and obligations before commencing work. In some cases excessive fees are paid to middlemen by seagoing personnel and workers which can lead to debt bondage. Participants emphasized that deceptive recruitment practices are known to occur in the industry. Written contracts and agreements (in their native language) may not be available and labor brokers, captains or production managers may request workers to pay fees, make large deposits and/or hand in their identity papers. On vessels the safekeeping of identity papers and seamen qualifications is important, but clear communication is needed on how accessible these documents are to the crew when requested. Furthermore, it is not clear whether agreements promote or inhibit seago-ing personnel and workers’ rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining.

companies can take measures to prevent these issues from taking place by having a recruitment policy in place, including a commitment to refrain from using unethical and non-transparent middlemen services. A code of practice for manning agents/recruitment agencies is important to set out minimum standards and provide a basis against which to audit recruiters. companies can adopt a zero recruitment fee policy, prohibit the involuntary withholding of identity papers and ensure the right to freedom of association and collective bargaining is upheld and clearly communicated to work-ers. Fishing companies can also ensure that corporate head offices are in possession of all relevant contracts, and that captains give workers the opportunity to store identity papers in captains’ offices for safe keeping. In addition, making all agreements and/or information available in the workers’ native language can ensure that workers under-stand their rights and obligations, taking into account, however, alternative means of communication in cases where workers are illiterate. In terms of sourcing seafood from suppliers, it is important for companies to report on the toolkits in place to understand their supply chain, whether labor brokers are used, and the conditions of work that supplier workers are subjected to. Verification of claims (worker contracts and working conditions) also needs to be considered.

Issues around fair wagesParticipants emphasized that equitable pay can be an issue in the industry. Given the general lack of oversight by trade unions in certain parts of the world for seagoing personnel, this can lead to cases of crew being underpaid and/or starting ‘in debt’ as a result of fees paid to brokers or intermediaries. As a result, deductions to crew and workers’ earnings are made, often without consent. On high sea vessels it is common practice that workers pay an extra fee to their captain for transferring part of their salaries to their families. companies can take measures to ensure equitable pay and implement a zero recruitment fee policy to prevent cases of bonded labor. Also, money transfer services can be provided to families at no cost and companies can ensure that deductions to earnings are transparent, properly recorded and available upon request.

Health and safety Participants raised the issue of health and safety on board vessels and in processing facilities. The International convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) does not cover fishing vessels and it was felt that relying on local laws or the ILO and IMO voluntary guidelines for fishermen and fishing vessels does not guarantee a certain standard of safety.

Participants emphasized that substance abuse, especially on vessels, can be an issue of concern despite policies being in place banning alcohol or drugs. In addition, bullying, discrimination and in extreme cases, physical disciplining, have been reported in investigative journalist articles. To prevent substandard working conditions, particularly on board vessels, preventive safety protocols are needed to minimize

•

•

015


exposure to hazardous working conditions. companies can improve performance in this area by developing and implementing a health and safety policy for vessels, aquaculture sites and processing facilities. Participants mentioned that companies can be given credit for creating a health and safety manual, which includes good practices, implementation plans and monitoring and evaluation. With regards to substance abuse, companies can adopt a zero-tolerance policy, including unannounced alcohol/drug testing on board with associated support programs. In cases where long working hours or short and intense fishing periods encourage crew to rely on substances to stay awake, this requires an industry response through multi-stakeholder platforms. Furthermore, companies can ensure that first aid, medical insurance and life insurance is available for personnel on board vessels and production sites. The adequate provi-sion of well-equipped resting facilities, as well as, recreational facilities can contribute to worker welfare. Adequate facilities for women in processing plants also needs to be considered.

Supplier codes of conduct and ethical trade policies Another issue that was raised was the absence of social aspects in existing supplier policies and codes of conduct, in particular for fishing vessels. An ethical trade policy and/or code of conduct can be adopted whereby companies commit not to undertake trading or commercial activities with suppliers that are not mindful of their ethical, social, and environmental responsibilities and set out minimum standards. Mapping the supply chain to better ‘track and trace’ seafood is an important step: for aquaculture this would include hatcheries, farms, feed mills and processing plants; for wild-caught seafood this would include the port of landing, vessel records, and transshipment records. According to participants, codes of conduct should apply to players across the entire seafood supply chain, including subcontractors, suppliers and recruitment agents. companies can build on and audit against criteria set by organizations such as the Business Social compliance Initiative (BScI), Sedex Members Ethical Trade Audit (SMETA), and the Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI) in the case of processing facilities. For labor practices in fishing operations voluntary, third-party standards can be drawn upon, such as the Seafish Responsible Fishing Scheme. If third-party certification of products is already in place that provides chain of custody, yet does not include labor standards, then engagement with the standard holder could also be an important step taken by companies to encourage uptake. Taking corrective action on the basis of audit outcomes was considered an important step that companies can take in this area. It was emphasized, however, that while there is a need to make suppliers aware of and interested in applying high standards in labor and human rights, the industry should also be cautious of supplier auditing over-burden, as has been the case in other sectors. Multi-stakeholder initiatives and platforms should be encouraged to ensure a common and shared approach, as the industry further develops these supplier standards and approaches. Traceability of products to ensure good labor standards at vessel, farm or processing plant level is particularly important in cases where batches are sourced from more than one vessel or farm.

Identifying the level of reporting required on these issues was considered an important action for Index Initiative. Additionally, it was emphasized that the bar when it comes to social performance is still quite low. Much of the debate in the seafood industry has focused on environmental themes in the past while there has been limited attention for social issues. Although this is changing, participants emphasized that the Index should acknowledge that the level of competencies in this regard is still quite low in the industry.

•

016


Fair operating practices focus on the ethical conduct in a business’ dealings with its stakeholders. In the context of the Index, neighboring communities, governments and business partners were mentioned as the most important stakeholders. Issues that could be considered for inclusion are the following, being mindful of the fact that many of these issues may overlap with the other impact areas.

Lobbying and advocacyTransparency about companies’ policy positions and lobbying activities, for example in RFMOs and the Eu, can be stimulated by rewarding this in the Index. Measurements and actions companies can take are sharing their policy positions on their websites and actively sharing data with civil society organizations and governmental agencies to contribute to better policy making.

Fair competitionIn addition to complying with (inter)national competition laws and regulations, companies can be rewarded for promoting fair competition. companies can promote adequate purchasing practices such as paying fair prices and offering stable and long-term contracts that allow for sustainable business relations. Implementing codes of conduct and ethics that set high standards of behavior and maintaining a zero tolerance policy on corruption can contribute to creating an environment of fair competition.

Promoting sustainability among suppliers Participants of the roundtable emphasized that seafood companies can use their strategic positon in the seafood value chain to promote ethically, socially, environ-mentally responsible behavior and gender equality among suppliers. They can do so by implementing supplier codes and investing in capacity building. Especially SMEs and smallholders can benefit from the knowledge and support that leading seafood companies can provide. This may include risk-sharing models in which risks and benefits associated with investing in more sustainable fisheries or aquaculture are shared.

Promoting respect for land and fishing rightsAnother issue that participants raised in this area is whether seafood companies source their products from vessels and farmers that have rights of capture, access or tenure. Having adequate and transparent procedures and mechanisms in place to check ownerships rights, licenses or quota as well as whether these are fairly obtained, can be rewarded by the Index.

Tax disclosureDriven by the OEcD and G20 among others, tax transparency is an issue that is emerging across the globe. Due to the global nature of the seafood industry, with many of the companies active in a significant number of countries, tax disclosure was also considered a relevant issue for this industry. Index Initiative could therefore consider exploring how it can include this issue in the Index.

fair operating practiceS

•

•

•

•

•

017


key takeawayS

• Public reporting on commitments around all issues and challenges is important to hold companies to account.

• Implementing and disclosing sourcing criteria was considered an important step in promoting more sustainable seafood.

• Community engagement is a relevant but emerging challenge for seafood companies. The Index should not overestimate the role of companies in this regard.

• When it comes to social issues (as opposed to environmental issues) such as labor and human rights, the bar in the industry is still quite low.

• Challenges within the fair operating practices dimension overlap with other stewardship dimensions.

018

Index Initiative - Seafood Stewardship IndexEXISTING FRAMEWORKS, cONVENTIONS, GuIDELINES AND STANDARDS

exiSting frameworkS, conventionS, guidelineS and StandardS

The Index aims to build its methodology for measuring corporate performance on existing frameworks, conventions, guidelines and standards where available and appropriate. Index Initiative identified the following sources as relevant for the Seafood Stewardship Index:• Sustainable Development Goals• ISO 26000• united Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights• OEcD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises• FAO code of conduct for Responsible Fisheries• FAO Voluntary Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries• ILO Work in Fishing convention, 2007 (No. 188)• ILO, IMO and FAO code of Safety for Fishermen and Fishing Vessels, Part A,

Safety and Health Practices for Skippers and crews

Seafood certification and ecolabeling schemes:• Marine Stewardship council (MSc)• Aquaculture Stewardship council (ASc)• Best Aquaculture Practices (BAP)• GLOBALG.A.P.• Global Sustainable Seafood Initiative (GSSI)

Fishery improvement projects (FIPs) and Aquaculture Improvement Projects (AIPs):• Guidelines for Supporting Fishery Improvement Projects (conservation Alliance)• Fisheryprogress.org (conservation Alliance and Fishchoice)• FIP Directory (Sustainable Fisheries Partnership)• FishSource (Sustainable Fisheries Partnership)• WWF’s Seafood Sustainability website

Participants were asked to comment on which of these existing frameworks, conven-tions, guidelines, and standards should be used in the methodology development and measurement process. Participants confirmed that these are relevant sources that can be used to develop the Index’ methodology. Additional sources mentioned by participants include the IFc Performance Standards, the FAO Guidelines for Responsible Aquaculture, the Regional Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries in Southeast Asia (SEAFDEc), the OIE Aquatic Animal Health code, and the Seafish Responsible Fishing Scheme. It was emphasized that many of the abovementioned sources focus predominantly on primary production and do not cover issues in processing sufficiently. It was suggested that Index Initiative can build on guidelines developed for other sectors such as apparel to fill this gap.

There was discussion on whether third-party certification should be given credit in the Index. While participants emphasized that seafood certification (preferably schemes recognized by GSSI) can serve as an indication of credible sustainable behavior, it was also mentioned that companies that perform well on sustainability criteria are not

019


necessarily certified. Participants advised Index Initiative to focus on relevant elements required for certification (e.g. processes, actions, reporting et cetera) and the systems that companies have in place rather than giving companies credit for being certified. Whereas ecolabeling is focused on consumers and companies, the Index should focus on whether companies actually have the policies, systems and processes in place that promote sustainability and transparency.

key takeawayS

• Existing frameworks and guidelines predominantly focus on primary production and do not cover issues in processing sufficiently. This is where the Index should add, potentially learning from other industries.

• Do not give companies credit for being certified or not but give them credit for the steps they have taken to improve sustainability.

EXISTING FRAMEWORKS, cONVENTIONS, GuIDELINES AND STANDARDS

020

Index Initiative - Seafood Stewardship IndexTHE uSE OF THIRD-PARTY DATA

the uSe of third-party data The Index will primarily rely on data provided by the companies. In addition, the Index considers using third-party data on fisheries and aquaculture production systems and regions to make an adequate risk assessment of a company’s product portfolio. These third-party data sources include SFP (FishSource), Monterey Bay Aquarium (Seafood Watch), Vancouver Aquarium (OceanWise) and Seafish (RASS), and the Fish Stock Sustainability Index (NOAA Fisheries). Participants were asked to comment on the applicability and credibility of these sources and whether additional data sources should be considered. The discussion also focused on whether this has any implications for species to be included in the Index’ scope.

In the discussion participants emphasized the Index should focus on the criteria companies apply when harvesting, producing or sourcing species. Applying a species scope is challenging as new fish enter the market and the robustness of stocks changes over time. Furthermore, it was emphasized that a species scope is less relevant for aquaculture as sustainability issues are more location related, rather than species specific. Participants therefore recommended to not include a species scope but to assess how companies select or exclude sources or fisheries from which they source.

Participants advised not to rely on third-party data as this is often not completely up to date, is dependent on external funding and should be considered as interpretation of scientific data. Rather than directly using these, it was suggested that Index Initiative assesses the process companies have in place, and the data sources they use to determine the health of stock and the sustainability of a fishery or production region.

It was also emphasized that obtaining reliable, good quality data from companies in seafood will be challenging as levels of transparency are low although this greatly differs from company to company. The Index can provide an important role in improving and stimulating transparency in the sector.

key takeawayS

• Focus on criteria companies apply when making decisions on harvesting, producing or sourcing specific species.

• The Index should assesses the processes companies have in place and the data sources they use to determine the health of stock and the sustainability of a fishery or production region.

021


puBlication &diSSeminationindex

next cycle

FOLLOW-uP AND NEXT STEPS

follow-up and next StepS Index Initiative will use the outcomes of the feasibility study, input from this roundtable and stakeholder dialogues and consultations to draft a Methodology Outline. This outline will be discussed during the first Expert Review committee meeting. The revised Methodology Outline will be discussed during the next roundtable. This roundtable has not yet been scheduled but is anticipated to take place right after the Sustainable Seafood Summit in Seattle in June 2017.

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

022

data collection & proceSSing

methodologydevelopment

Stakeholder dialogue

company outreach

index development

trajectory

figure 2

Index Initiative - Seafood Stewardship IndexLIST OF PARTIcIPANTS

liSt of participantS

firSt name / SurnameTitleOrganization

fitrian ardianSyah Indonesia Country Director IDH The Sustainable Trade Initiative

jacqui dixonChair of the Roundtable Independent Expert

joe feld Chief Migration Officer, Counsellor (Immigration and Border Protection) Australian Embassy in Jakarta

duncan leadBitter Sustainable Fisheries Expert Fishmatter

ichiro nomuraFormer Assistant Director-General FAO Fisheries Department

michele rota Fisheries Policy & RegulationTri Marine Group

ratana chuenpagdeeProject DirectorToo Big To Ignore

guillaume drillet President of the Asian Pacific ChapterWord Aquaculture Society

gerBrand haverkamp Program Director Index Initiative

Sophie le clue Director Environment Programme ADM capital Foundation

lida pet-SoedeLeader Marine UnitPT Hatfield Indonesia

willem SchouStraSenior Policy Officer Blue Growth & Food Security Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs

023

titia SjenitZerSenior Product Integrity ManagerMarine Stewardship council

purBaSari Surjadi Chief of StaffSustainable Fisheries Partnership

heny SoeliStyowatiPrivate Sector CoordinatorOxfam Indonesia

anna Suttorp Project Manager Index Initiative

Index Initiative - Seafood Stewardship IndexLIST OF PARTIcIPANTS

024

wilf SwartZDirector of Department on Fisheries Sustainability Ocean Policy Research Institute

Borgar tormodSgard First Secretary for Politics and Trade Royal Norwegian Embassy in Jakarta

willem van der pijl Aquaculture Program Developer and Director Seafood Trade Intelligence Portal Solidaridad

nick wareliS Sustainability ExpertcSR Asia

huw thomaS Senior Officer, Business Partnerships & Out-reach, Global Campaign to End Illegal Fishing The Pew charitable Trusts

joSh van Berkel Principle Environment Expert DHI Group

liSanne urlingSLead Researcher Index Initiative

lucie waSSink Agricultural CounselorEmbassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands in Indonesia

toShiya yaBuki General Manager Aquaculture Business Promotion Office Nippon Suisan Kaisha (Nissui)

diSclaimer This report is intended to be for information purposes only and is not intended as promotional material in any respect.

copyrightNo part of this report may be reproduced in any manner without the written permission of Index Initiative. All opinions expressed herein are subject to change without notice.

photoSIndex Initiative

deSign Omdat Ontwerp AmsterdamThe Netherlands

index initiativeWeWork MetropoolWeesperstraat 611018 VN AmsterdamThe Netherlands

www.indexinitiative.org +31 6 45 78 85 80 [email protected]

seafood stewardship index...the seafood stewardship index will primarily rely on data provided by...

Documents