Products from PT. International Alliance Food Indonesia (Source: Indonesia Seafood Naturally Diverse website).

Greenpeace Southeast Asia released its latest tuna cannery ranking evaluating 23 canneries and brands from the Philippines, Thailand and Indonesia based on their policies on sustainability, transparency and equitability. In the Sea to Can: 2018 Southeast Asia Canned Tuna Ranking Report, only five canneries were identified as overall green performers:  Alliance Select Foods International (Philippines), PT International Alliance Foods Indonesia (Indonesia), PT Samudra Mandiri Sentosa (Indonesia), PT Sinar Pure Foods International (Indonesia), and Tops Supermarket (Thailand).

“After three years of proactive engagement, brands and canneries in the region are now more open and collaborative to work with Greenpeace and consumers on fixing their supply chains. But, unfortunately, they are still not transitioning swiftly enough in response to the alarming state of our oceans,” said Ephraim Batungbacal, Regional Oceans Research Coordinator for Greenpeace Southeast Asia.

Tuna continues to be the most economically valuable fish in the world.  Southeast Asian countries Thailand, Philippines, Indonesia, and Vietnam are among the top 10 exporters of processed canned tuna, with a combined income of USD 3.016 billion. A total of USD 7 billion worth of canned tuna products was exported in 2017.

The Greenpeace report comes at a time when tuna stocks globally are experiencing intense pressure from destructive fishing practices and overfishing.  Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) fishing remains rampant in this part of the world. For this reason, the European Union (EU) – one of the biggest importers of tuna from the region – issued a yellow card sanction against Thailand in 2015 and Vietnam in 2017 for failing to combat IUU, which remains in effect pending these countries’ compliance.

Greenpeace’s tuna rankings evaluate canneries by checking the company’s performance against a seven-point criteria on their tuna sourcing practices. Companies are strongly encouraged to favor and source tuna from lower-impact fishing methods including pole and line, handline, troll or Fish Aggregating Devices (FAD) free purse seining.

This year, there were notable improvements in the sector, specifically:

  • More companies now have tighter policies on traceability and sustainability, resulting in increased procurement of sustainably caught tuna, with 11 companies sourcing using pole and line, and 11 companies sourcing FAD-free purse seine.
  • Heightened awareness of issues on slavery at sea and improved measures to avoid inadvertently sourcing tuna associated with human rights and labor abuse.
  • Consumers now have access to more product information, with improved labelling at the point of sale for the public to identify the species and how tuna is caught.
  • Constructive dialogue with major tuna companies through regular communication.

Despite this, it is important to note that the Philippines and Indonesia continue to catch juvenile Yellowfin and Bigeye tuna at 20-50 cm in length, usually by a fleet of purse seiners. If juvenile fishing is not addressed, this will impact the health condition of tuna stocks and the marine ecosystem.

Some canneries also have a “double standard” approach to product disclosure, exercising more or less stringent rules depending on the country of destination. Greenpeace calls on companies to use the same sourcing standards across the board and make product information available to all consumers regardless of where the product is sold.

“Transparency is key. While we appreciate constructive dialogue with these regional canneries, we would like to see accountability and responsibility from these regional canneries towards consumers here in Southeast Asia. If they have nothing to hide, then a substantial disclosure about their products is necessary,” added Batungbacal.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Temasek uses auditing firm KPMG which was severely criticised by UK watchdog for poor quality work

Last month, BBC reported that international audit firm KPMG has been severely…

“临时”了60年的刑事法(临时条款)

撰文:人权律师M.Ravi  翻译:北雁 刑事法(临时条款)(CLTPA)被“临时”延长了六十年,还算是临时条款吗?该法在1955年颁布,就连名称本身都用词不当,新加坡人又再一次被愚弄了。 我们知道,该法赋权部长,未经审讯,就可下令拘留嫌犯。这原本是殖民时代的产物,是为了对应那个时代危机的临时措施。 然而,即便国家独立后,法令还沿用至今,新加坡可说是全球唯一,把一项“临时措施”保留了超过半世纪的国家。 而最近的刑事法(临时条款)修正法案,则针对部长拘留权限附加以下条款: “针对第(1)分款【拘留令和警察监视】事项,部长的所有决策均为最终决定。” 我已经说过,让部长干预警方执法的角色,很危险。上述条文也把司法机构审查任何拘留案件的权限,排除在外,使得透过司法程序挑战变得极为困难。 简言之,就是压迫基本权利,司法机构也无法、甚至对于审查有关拘捕或警察监视令是否公正,无法起作用。 在我执业期间,曾遇过一些个案、有者年仅19岁,声称自己无辜且被人诬陷。即便辩护他们的证据很无力,但却因为类似上述的法令,他们甚至连在法庭面对审判的机会都没有。 我们既然已经有针对高利贷和私会党活动制定了严法,这种“临时”措施,就不应再扩大并延伸到更广泛的犯罪行为。 刑事法(临时条款)近期的修法,…