An asterisk at the end of a report title indicates that earlier versions of the report are available. If you would like to request an older report, write to us at [email protected].
ISSF 2017-09: An Evaluation of the Sustainability of Global Tuna Stocks Relative to Marine Stewardship Council Criteria*
|Date added||December 20, 2017|
|Category||Technical and Meeting Reports, Technical Reports|
|Tags||Albacore Tuna, Bigeye Tuna, Harvest Strategies, IATTC, ICCAT, IOTC, MSC Certification, RFMOs, science, Skipjack, Stock Status, Tuna, WCPFC, Yellowfin Tuna|
|Author(s)||Paul A. H. Medley, Jo Gascoigne|
The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) has established a program whereby a fishery may be certified as being sustainable. The sustainability of a fishery is defined by MSC criteria embodied in three Principles: relating to the status of the stock (Principle 1), the ecosystem of which the stock is a member (Principle 2), and the fishery management system (Principle 3).
Since many of these MSC criteria are comparable for global tuna stocks, the MSC scoring system was used to evaluate 19 stocks of tropical and temperate tunas throughout the world (based on Principle 1) and also to evaluate the management systems of the Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs) associated with these stocks (based on Principle 3).
The 2017 report with P1 and P3 scores, “An Evaluation of the Sustainability of Global Tuna Stocks Relative to Marine Stewardship Council Criteria,” is authored by Paul A. H. Medley and Jo Gascoigne. It does not evaluate fishery-specific ecosystem criteria (P2).
“An Evaluation of the Sustainability of Global Tuna Stocks Relative to Marine Stewardship Council Criteria” is designed to:
- Provide a basis for comparing between stock scores as assessed by the same experts
- Become a useful source document for future tuna certifications or in the establishment of tuna Fishery Improvement Projects (FIPs)
- Offer a “snapshot” of the current status of the stocks, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of RFMOs
- Prioritize ISSF projects and advocacy efforts against initiatives that will improve low performance indicator scores
The report has been updated several times since it was first published in 2013.