Food Security Amidst Crime: Harm of Illegal Fishing and Fish Fraud on Sustainable Oceans

The universal imprint of oxygen isotopes can track the origins of seafood

“…Furthermore, a universal marker approach negates the requirement for developing time‐consuming reference databases for individual species and target regions (Li et al, 2016), which is a drawback of current chemical marker methods and a barrier to adoption by industry (Camin et al, 2016). However, incentives to employ provenance technology to support sustainable seafood practices are inconsistent, with seafood labelling standards and regulations varying by jurisdiction (Lindley, 2021). Involvement from PDO protection consortia, producer associations, or eco‐certification organisations can all play a role in driving real‐world implementations (Camin et al, 2016).…”

“…Provenance fraud occurs when consumers or businesses are intentionally deceived about where seafood is caught or its production method, with products often substituted with lowerquality and lower-value options, or harvested from locations with fewer regulations regarding sustainability or ethics concerns. Such substitution threatens our food system by jeopardising sustainability, safety, and consumer confidence (Lindley, 2020;van Ruth et al, 2017).…”

Fisheries Crime and Ocean Resilience

“…Crimes that occur within the fishing industry may relate to fishing themselves (commonly referred to as illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing) or indeed extend to other crimes that may enable it in some way, such as corruption of border and fishing license officials, transhipment of (legal and illegal) catches in international waters, or trafficking of humans to supply cheap or free labor aboard vessels (Lindley et al, 2018;Martini, 2013;Steele & Adomeit, 2019;United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 2011). It may also involve fraud, whereby mislabeled fish and seafood are on sold to the consumer unknowingly (Lindley, 2021b). Evidence also exists of strong links to transnational organized crime (Lindley, 2018;Martini, 2013;United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 2011;Witbooi et al, 2020).…”

“…Given its large seafood import footprint, the EU's tough stance on seafood import controls is positive; however, there is a void between what is legally expected by states exporting to the EU and what those same exporting states expect for their own imported seafood supply. Indeed, Australia meets the EU's labeling requirements for exports but lowers its labeling standards for its own consumersdespite having the same available information (Lindley, 2021b). These additional labeling requirements position the consumer to make informed and (likely) sustainable choices; thus, the regulations enable consumers to make sustainable choices when purchasing seafood.…”

“…Additionally, there exists a disconnect between international and domestic standards and demand for exotic food may reduce the vigilance of some consumers in order to obtain the unobtainable. Despite the existence of the International Union for Conservation of Nature's (IUCN) Red Lista list that raises awareness of endangered speciessome governments still allow imports of endangered and threatened species, such as caviar from the critically endangered Beluga sturgeons (Gesner et al, 2010;Lindley, 2021b). These threatened species farmed to harvest their caviar should be harmoniously banned around the world (Gesner et al, 2010; International Union for Conservation of Nature, 2020).…”