Estimates of illegal and unreported fish in seafood imports to the USA

Pramod, Ganapathiraju; Nakamura, Katrina; Pitcher, Tony J.; Delagran, Leslie

doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2014.03.019

Cited by 186 publications

(130 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

122

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These seafood may be exported post-harvest, after primary processing, or following secondary processing as a store ready product. Moreover, seafood may pass through one or more intermediary countries for post-harvest processing and subsequent re-export (Pramod et al 2014;FAO 2016a).…”

Section: Marketmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The seafood supply chain from a fraudulent perspective

Mitchell²,

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Food fraud is an intentional act for economic gain. It poses a risk to food integrity, the economy, public health and consumers' ethics. Seafood is one commodity which has endured extensive fraudulent activity owing to its increasing consumer demand, resource limitations, high value and complex supply chains. It is essential that these fraudulent opportunities are revealed, the risk is evaluated and countermeasures for mitigation are assigned. This can be achieved through mapping of the seafood supply chains and identifying the vulnerability analysis critical control points (VACCP), which can be exposed, infiltrated and exploited for fraudulent activity. This research systematically maps the seafood supply chain for three key commodities: finfish, shellfish and crustaceans in the United Kingdom. Each chain is comprised of multiple stakeholders across numerous countries producing a diverse range of products distributed globally. For each supply chain the prospect of fraud, with reference to species substitution, fishery substitution, illegal, unreported and unregulated substitution, species adulteration, chain of custody abuse, catch method fraud, undeclared product extension, modern day slavery and animal welfare, has been identified and evaluated. This mapping of the fraudulent opportunities within the supply chains provides a foundation to rank known and emerging risks and to develop a proactive mitigation plan which assigns control measures and responsibility where vulnerabilities exist. Further intelligence gathering and management of VACCPs of the seafood supply chains may deter currently unknown or unexposed fraudulent opportunities.

show abstract

Section: Marketmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Commonly, these include brokers, traders, wholesalers, distributors and other middlemen, often distant from the consumer and the markets they supply (Schell et al 2012;Pramod et al 2014). Each actor carries out diverse and variable operations and functions to achieve a complex range of products distributed nationally and internationally.…”

Section: Consumersmentioning

confidence: 99%

The seafood supply chain from a fraudulent perspective

Mitchell²,

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In fact, the surplus of 358 genetically identified samples that fall in the "DataDeficient"/"Not-Evaluated" categories excluded from the analysis, inevitably generate an upward bias in conservation status of "true ID" specimens. These "ghost" species ring a significant alarm bell regarding the issue of IUU fishing (Pramod et al 2014), which is mentioned by the authors in the introduction, but then is disappointingly left at the margins.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Mislabeling Seafood Does Not Promote Sustainability: A Comment on Stawitz et al. (2016)

Mariani

Cawthorn

Hanner

2017

CONSERVATION LETTERS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently, Stawitz et al. collated existing primary literature on DNA identification of finfish products and conducted a series of analyses to explore the environmental and economic ripples of species substitution. While we agree that the assessment of the impacts of seafood mislabeling is paramount, we show that the main conclusion of the study, which hints at a positive ecological impact arising from misnaming traded finfish species, is not warranted by the data, and may inadvertently cause damage to public perceptions of seafood provision, sustainability, and marine resource management.The study by Stawitz et al. (2016) is the latest attempt to assess the global environmental and economic consequences of seafood mislabeling, a conservation issue that has rapidly come to prominence over the last decade (Pardo et al. 2016). After perusing the article with keen interest, we identified a number of shortcomings that undermine the veracity of the authors' main conclusion: the idea that somehow seafood mislabeling has a positive impact on ecological sustainability.First, the use of the IUCN Red List is a very blunt tool for comparing the collated dataset. The "labeled" products are sourced from a range of stocks under varying degrees of demographic/management status, making them poorly comparable with genetically identified substitutes. Questions also hang over the "averaging" of IUCN status across genera/families ( Figure S1). Even assuming we could rely on IUCN status for the labeled "species," many species/stocks increasingly featuring on global markets have never been assessed by the IUCN. In fact, the surplus of 358 genetically identified samples that fall in the "Data-

show abstract

“…First, the image points to the extensive, global web of interdependencies stemming from economic, political, social, and ecological relations between fish, fishers, industries, governments and consumers, which is also referred to as the "seafood supply chain" (Pramod et al 2014). The totality of these interdependencies between people and the rest of nature can be thought of as a social-ecological system (Berkes and Folke 1998).…”

Section: Metaphorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A chain of fools: or, why it is so hard to stop overfishing

Boonstra

Österblom

2014

Maritime Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We fish too much, and by doing so, we threaten marine ecosystems and people's livelihoods. But the curious thing is: we have known this for a long time. Nonetheless, we continue to overfish. How is that possible? Why can we not stop? This paper recounts our search for an answer. We start by giving an overview of how scientists explain overfishing, and suggest that the riddle of its obduracy has not been addressed systematically. We conceptualize overfishing as an unplanned and unintended outcome of a chain of interrelated social and ecological events. We then analyze the chain of events leading to overfishing for two typical cases -the groundfish fishery in the Gulf of Maine and the South African abalone (Haliotis midae, Haliotidae) fishery -and two atypical cases where overfishing has stopped or been substantially reduced -the Patagonian and Antarctic toothfish (Dissostichus eleginoides, Nototheniidae and Dissostichus mawsoni, Nototheniidae) fishery in the Southern Ocean, and the Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua, Gadidae) fishery in the Barents Sea. Studying and comparing these cases reveals no sufficient set of factors to explain the persistence of overfishing. Rather, distinct pathways emerge from a concatenation of proximate and remote factors, leading to and sustaining overfishing. Understanding these pathways and their mechanisms can assist in locating leverage points for intervention aimed to stop overfishing.

show abstract

Estimates of illegal and unreported fish in seafood imports to the USA

Cited by 186 publications

References 15 publications

The seafood supply chain from a fraudulent perspective

The seafood supply chain from a fraudulent perspective

Mislabeling Seafood Does Not Promote Sustainability: A Comment on Stawitz et al. (2016)

A chain of fools: or, why it is so hard to stop overfishing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About