Seafood companies should provide proof to back up their claims

“Sustainable”. “Ocean-friendly”. “Responsible”. From canned tuna to frozen fish sticks, these “green” claims seem to be slapped on every kind of seafood product in our grocery stores these days. But what do they mean? And better still, can we count on them to deliver on their promises? SeaChoice decided to find out. Spoiler alert: some are fishier than others. Read on to find out which.

“Green” or environmental claims – logos and written statements – are supposed to help take the guesswork out of the selection process for shoppers who want to make ocean-friendly seafood purchases. When done right, claims represent a mechanism through which seafood consumers can ‘vote with their wallets’ and improve fishery and aquaculture practices by doing so. But greenwashing, the practice of making a misleading or unsubstantiated claim, can undermine this influence by fooling well-intentioned shoppers and shifting consumer preferences toward products that are not environmentally beneficial and/or creating an unwarranted favourable image of a company.

We know that Canadians care about greenwashing. A YouGov poll conducted simultaneously with our investigation found that 83% of Canadians are concerned about greenwashing and 78% would likely stop purchasing a seafood product if its claim was found to be greenwashing.

So, is there a warranted concern that greenwashing is taking place in Canadian supermarket fresh cases, aisles and freezers?

In our study, Certification, Verification or Fabrication? an investigation of seafood environmental claims in Canadian retailers, released last week, we gathered data about environmental claims by going to 18 supermarket locations across five Canadian cities and provinces. Our sample consisted of 234 environmental claims across 181 seafood products.

It’s important to understand that not all environmental claims are created equal. Some claims can be independent, such as third-party certifications (e.g., MSC, ASC and BAP) or non-governmental endorsements (e.g., Ocean Wise), or private company self-declarations. We categorized the claims into three types: certifications, endorsements, and self-declared claims. The different types of claims vary in their scope, accuracy, transparency and rigour. They also vary in their interpretation of “sustainability” as there are no regulations that strictly define the term for seafood (or any other commodity) sold in Canada. 

First, we documented the prevalence of each environmental claim type and found self-declared claims – those made only by the brand, without any third-party backing – were the most common (44% of all claims). The rest were 33% endorsements and 23% certifications.

Next, we checked whether the claims were backed up by publicly available evidence (i.e., the product label or website) and investigated whether the claim on the product could be verified to be from environmentally friendly fisheries or farms. Forty per cent of self-declarations failed to provide evidence and around six out of every ten self-declared claims were unverifiable. In comparison certifications, followed by endorsements, were found to be far more reliable.

Finally, we compared self-declared claims against international best practice guidelines for environmental claims. Eight out of every ten self-declared claims were found to be vague and non-specific, over a third failed to provide an explanatory statement with the claim and nearly a quarter used the term “sustainable” (or a variation thereof) despite the recommendation by guidelines not to do so. 

In summary, the most frequently found environmental claim type in Canadian supermarkets, self-declarations by companies, were the hardest to verify, typically lacked evidence and were often vague. Why would this be so? Self-declared claims rarely involve independent checks. In comparison, certifications generally have four common features: governance structures, standards for sustainability and chain-of-custody, an auditing function, and on-product logos. Self-declared claims typically lack the first three.

SeaChoice is calling on the government to enact stronger requirements for self-declared claims, particularly for the use of the words “sustainable” and “responsible”, by stipulating that a third-party verification is the only acceptable evidence to support their use. Our investigation findings also support SeaChoice’s push for better seafood labelling laws, as having these would help substantiate the environmental credentials of a given product.

What about conscientious shoppers just looking to buy some seafood for dinner that won’t harm the oceans? Based on our findings, your best bets are certified products, complementing these with endorsed products as needed. Regardless of the claim type, but particularly when purchasing self-declared products, look for evidence to back up the claim on the product or website. In fact, 90% of you agree that companies should provide publicly available information to back up their claims. So, tell your retailer and the seafood companies whose products  are sold within their stores that you expect this evidence to be provided.

Lastly, If a product with an environmental claim lacks evidence to back it up, or if you suspect the claim may be a deceptive representation of the product (i.e., greenwashing), contact the Canadian Food Inspection Agency to report a food labelling concern.  Because at the end of the day, fishy claims shouldn’t have a place in our grocery aisles and freezers.