Considering that several tuna stocks are at risk and that overfishing continues to threaten marine ecosystems, choosing more sustainable seafood products is really important. In this context, certifications such as the MSC (Marine Stewardship Council) could offer guidance, through the famous blue seal which indicates products coming from fishing considered sustainable.
This certification is only granted to fleets that respect three fundamental principles: healthy fish stocks, minimal impact on marine ecosystems and effective fisheries management. In practice, the blue label should guarantee consumers that the tuna purchased comes from responsible fishing, respectful of the species and the environment. But according to a new report by Foodwatch Germany, published with the support of Bloom, this is not exactly the case.
The report, entitled “Thunfisch: Täuschung in Dosen” (“Tuna: canned deception”), raises several critical issues on the sustainability of MSC-certified tuna fishing, particularly in the western Indian Ocean (FAO area 51).
The report
According to the report, which is based on official data from MSC certified fleets, monitoring audits and reports from on-board observers, the blue seal, which is supposed to indicate sustainable fishing, may not fully reflect reality.
Bonito Baits (Skipjack Tuna) would be marketed as sustainable products, while the same fleets could simultaneously catch non-certified species, such as Yellowfin Tuna and Bigeye Tuna. The nets would collect all three species together, but only the Skipjack would receive the seal, thus giving consumers an impression of sustainability that is not complete.
The document indicates that some MSC-certified European fleets may include up to 47% of overfished species (i.e. fished at rates exceeding their population’s capacity to regenerate) in their catch. Between 2018 and 2022, the CFTO fleet would have included approximately 40% Yellowfin Tuna and 7% Bigeye Tuna in its catch, while only marketing Skipjack as sustainable. According to the report, the problem arises from the fact that overfished young tuna and other species tend to group with Skipjacks under FADs (Fish Aggregating Devices), floating devices that attract fish.
The report documents the presence of significant bycatch. In 2022, the MSC-certified Echebastar fleet would capture among others:
According to the report, it is estimated that up to 200,000 silky sharks could die trapped in FADs without being officially registered.
Even the Skipjack Tuna, despite being the only species officially MSC certified, could be subjected to too high pressure. Between 2018 and 2022, annual catches would exceed scientifically established limits by approximately 30%, with 666,408 tonnes caught in 2022 alone.
Foodwatch also reports that although Yellowfin Tuna in the Indian Ocean has been considered an overfish since 2015, the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC) would have reclassified it as “not at risk” at the end of 2024. Such a reclassification could be controversial, as the data used to assess the stocks would not have been completely transparent.
What Foodwatch asks for
Foodwatch has made some requests to the competent authorities and supply chain operators, specifically:
For the sake of accuracy, we have contacted the MSC for a response to the observations contained in the report. We publish it below in full.
MSC’s reply
Unlike the Foodwatch report, the MSC label on canned tuna is not misleading, but comes exclusively from healthy, non-overfished stocks.
The MSC program is the world’s most rigorous and recognized certification program for sustainable fishing. It meets all the requirements of the international umbrella organization for environmental and social standards setters, ISEAL, as well as those of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) for transparent and credible certification programs. Just last week, FAO recognized MSC’s contribution to greater global fisheries sustainability and ocean health.
We welcome and support any calls for transparency and credibility in sustainability claims on food products and in the thorough examination of certification marks. However, Foodwatch’s allegations about the alleged greenwashing of MSC-certified tuna products are based on false assumptions and perceptions.
The Foodwatch report suggests that consumers have been misled by the MSC branding on cans of skipjack tuna because the same fisheries that catch certified sustainable skipjack also catch other tuna species that are not sustainably managed. This assumption ignores the fact that an MSC certification does not necessarily cover an entire fishery or fleet, but refers to clearly defined fishing units consisting of a target species, specific fishing gear and specific fishing vessels. This is consistent with the FAO definition of fishing activities.
Therefore, if a fishery is MSC certified only for catching one species, it can still catch other non-certified species. However, only fish that comply with the MSC Standard can be sold with the blue label, while other products cannot be presented as sustainable according to MSC.
Certification of specific components of a fishery is by no means a deception to consumers, but rather a common practice in many credible and well-recognized certification programs. For example, a farm may be Fairtrade certified for growing coffee, but not for growing cocoa. This differentiated certification practice does not lead to misleading or deceptive information for consumers, provided that the certification is accurate and transparent, which is ensured for MSC seafood products through sustainable fishing and chain of custody certifications, and controls along the entire supply chain.
Positive change in global fisheries is complex and takes time. Each MSC certification, even if initially limited to a single target species, represents an important step in the right direction. Certification of specific components of a fishery can create incentives for improvement in other parts of the same fishery, as a fishery will be motivated to extend the benefits of MSC certification, such as improved market access and increased revenue, to all of its fisheries. In this way, MSC creates an economic rationale to gradually bring the entire fishery to a sustainable level.
Certifying a fishery for just one target species does not mean that the fishery can do whatever it wants to other species caught in the same operation. Even when a fishery is certified for a single species, such as skipjack tuna, the assessment must also take into account all other unwanted commercial catches, such as albacore and bigeye tuna, made by that fishery during operations under the MSC programme. If it is discovered that these additional catches, which Foodwatch defines as bycatch, negatively affect the health or recovery of the relevant stock, the fishing activity cannot be certified even for the individual component being assessed. The same applies to unwanted catches of species such as sharks and other vulnerable species. Their status and the effectiveness of measures in place to minimize impacts must be assessed as part of the certification process to ensure that the fishery as a whole operates in an environmentally sustainable manner. Overall, certification is based on rigorous assessments that monitor the state of stocks on a science-based basis and ensure that the fishery is managed sustainably.
MSC does not adopt a generalist approach to fishing, but asks for each case to be assessed individually to investigate the sustainable use of fishing gear. Sustainable fishing is a very complex issue that requires specialist knowledge, a scientific approach and a long-term commitment to improvement. Generalized statements about the (un)sustainability of some fishing gear, such as trawl nets or fish aggregating devices (FADs), are overly simplistic. The sustainability or otherwise of a type of tool always depends on the specific context, on how and where it is used. Therefore, MSC assessments always examine each case individually.
Sources: Foodwatch Germany /MSC
