MSC
SEAFOOD
CONFIDENCE HIGH · ANALYSIS ONLY, NOT AN AUDIT OR CERTIFICATION
Our read
MSC is the most substantive wild-capture seafood standard in wide commercial use, and on one point it is stronger than most schemes in this dataset: its chain of custody requires physical segregation, so mass balance is not permitted and a labelled pack contains fish from the certified fishery. Principle 3 is titled "Certified products are segregated" and the standard prohibits substitution outright. The weaker part is the fishery assessment itself. A fishery can certify with indicator scores between 60 and 79 and close the gaps as conditions over the certificate term, so the blue label can appear on a fishery that has not yet met the 80 benchmark across the board. The objection process is the most cited structural problem: the adjudicator is engaged and paid by MSC, the fee is substantial, and objections have rarely reversed a certification. BLOOM and the On the Hook coalition have argued the standard has been loosened as MSC's logo-royalty income grew. The most common reader error is treating the blue tick as a statement about carbon, crew welfare or packaging. It addresses none of those.
What it covers
- wild-capture fishery assessed against three principles: stock status, ecosystem impact, effective management
- target stock is above or rebuilding toward a biologically based reference point
- impacts on bycatch, habitat and endangered/threatened/protected species scored per indicator
- fins-naturally-attached policy required for any fishery retaining sharks (v3.0 onward)
- physical segregation of certified product through the whole supply chain (no mass balance)
- no species substitution and no mislabelling by species or catch area
- eligibility screen excluding fisheries with recent forced-labour or child-labour convictions
- third-party labour audit for higher-risk chain-of-custody sites
What it leaves out
Not a criticism of the scheme. A standard is a scope, and this is where this one ends.
- farmed seafood entirely (that is ASC scope)
- no greenhouse gas, fuel-use or Scope 3 requirement anywhere in the standard
- no animal welfare or humane-slaughter criteria
- no packaging, plastics or product end-of-life criteria
- no wage, hours or freedom-of-association standard for crew beyond the conviction screen
- unit-of-assessment scoping: one gear type or stock can be certified while the same company fishes uncertified elsewhere
- certification permitted at indicator scores of 60-79 with conditions to be closed over the certificate term, so a certified fishery may not yet meet the 80 benchmark on every indicator
- chain of custody does NOT permit mass balance, but the Group and Consumer-Facing Organisation variants audit only a sample of sites, not every site
The scheme
| Issued by | Marine Stewardship Council (MSC), London, UK |
|---|---|
| Where it applies | Global |
| Audit and renewal | Fishery: five-year certificate with annual surveillance audits and re-assessment at expiry. Chain of custody: three-year certificate with periodic surveillance audits. |
| Cost | Not published as a single fee schedule. Assessment cost is quoted by the conformity assessment body and varies widely with fishery size. Separately, MSC charges a logo licence royalty on labelled retail and foodservice product, which is the organisation's dominant income source. |
What we read
MSC Fisheries Standard v3.1, 22 July 2024; MSC Chain of Custody Standard: Default Version v5.0, published 28 March 2019, effective 28 September 2019
- standard_version_read, what_it_covers (shark fins, ETP species) — All fisheries that retain sharks are now required to have a Fins Naturally Attached policy in place
- what_it_covers, what_it_omits (segregation, no mass balance) — Principle 3 Certified products are segregated. 3.1 There shall be no substitution of certified products with non-certified products.
- what_it_omits (Group and CFO variants sample sites) — The CAB audits the central office and a sample of sites, rather than auditing every site.
- renewal_period (CoC three-year certificate) — subject to periodic surveillance audits over the three-year period of a CoC certificate
- independence_score (ASI accreditation) — please contact Assurance Services International GmbH (ASI)
- cost_range, yko_assessment (logo royalty is dominant income) — Most of this funding comes from the logo licensing fee paid by brands, retailers and food service organisations
- yko_assessment (objection process criticism, royalty share) — the 'independent adjudicator' supposed to decide whether an objection should result in the suspension of a certificate is recruited and remunerated by the MSC
- yko_assessment (On the Hook review findings) — the MSC's drive for growth and income has come at the expense of the Standard's effectiveness
- enforcement_score (published suspensions) — MSC certificate suspended for Gulf of Maine lobster fishery
- yko_assessment (formal objections rarely succeed) — A review of formal objections to Marine Stewardship Council fisheries certifications
What we could not establish
Could not retrieve MSC's audited financial statements to state an exact logo-royalty percentage for the most recent year; the 88 percent figure circulating in NGO commentary refers to 2023 and is not confirmed from MSC's own filings here. Did not confirm whether a Chain of Custody version later than v5.0 is now in force; MSC's document library filename still resolves to v5.0 while some third-party indexes label it v5.1. Assessment fee ranges are set by individual CABs and are not published by MSC.
Who holds it
Scored companies carrying this mark, highest first. Holding it is not the same as scoring well — the mark is one input of six.
| Company | Scope held | YKO score |
|---|---|---|
| Safe Catch | Not stated | 20.3 |
If you hold this certification, it is already on your record. What a buyer cannot see there yet is the evidence behind the parts this standard does not reach.