PurposeThe objective of this study is to assess if Italian fish consumers are sensible to shark protection and if they would contribute paying more for small pelagic fishes coming from fisheries that are certified as “shark-free”.Design/methodology/approachContingent valuation is used to estimate willingness to pay with a double approach, including a dichotomous choice and an open-ended question. Inconsistency between the two answers is allowed. This allows the correction of two sources of bias (i.e. preference uncertainty and anchoring effect) and has permitted that the two estimation methods converged to the same result.FindingsConsumers show interest for the “shark-free” label. Premium price is estimated at +26%. Variables affecting willingness to pay (WTP) in the sample are age, income, environmental attitude, knowledge of organic labels and frequency of small pelagics' consumption. Results need to be confirmed by a replication on a larger (probabilistic) sample and with a different distribution of bids.Originality/valueEcosystems provide different benefits to humankind, including non-use services, such as the satisfaction to know that a species is well conserved. Generally, appreciation is higher for what are considered charismatic species. In this paper, the authors investigate if sharks can be considered charismatic species despite their “bad reputation”. The interest in shark survival is measured indirectly using a “shark-free” label on a commercial species like anchovy, allowing to increase the value added of this low-price species.