World Wildlife fund`s role in the future of the Marine Stewardship council should be to increase its support in all areas so that it maintains its point of actions that were adopted. It should enable the marine stewardship council to maintain its governance and transparency help it to be consistence with quality of fishery certification, and motivate it to promote environmental performance and sustainability.
Marine stewardship council (MSC) started in 1997 and experienced difficult circumstances. For instance, the council experienced tension with the conservation community, lack of trust and opposition from the industry and national governments, financial crisis. These difficulties made it hard for the organization to achieve its major challenges like establishing international certification scheme for sustainable fisheries. Therefore, the World Wildlife Fund should continue to support the Marine stewardship council because the process of improving the management of the fisheries in the world cannot definitely be achieved by establishing new and drastic systems, but shifting into effective ecosystem-based management needs as more change culturally as it does in technical or policy terms. Therefore, the fund needs to give the marine stewardship council time so that it can adopt the best practice in mitigating effects on the marine environment. This will enable the council to also have greater understanding of the implications of adopting a full ecosystem-based management approach.
The Marine Stewardship Council`s crisis of credibility is referred to as lack of truthfulness or not reliable. Therefore, the marine stewardship council is not reliable enough and it may close unless something drastic is done to earn its credibility back. For instance, according to International institute for management development, although the fish being sold all over the world carry the logo of Marine Stewardship Council and claims that fisheries it certifies are sustainable is not true because it just deceives the consumers. There are still many fisheries that have not complied with the fisheries act that needs action to be taken in order to avoid adverse effects on the aquatic environment. The marine stewardship council`s crisis credibility has impacted negatively the relationship between the world wildlife fund and the Marine stewardship council. For instance, as a result of this crisis of credibility, Marine Stewardship council stopped receiving support from the World wildlife fund and this made it to undergo financial crisis. This also led to the loss of a third of its workforce and lack of enough resources.
The Marine Stewardship council`s point of action has been effective because after undergoing through assessment for almost four years, some of the world`s largest white fish fisheries became certified. The council also merged together with the biggest suppliers of meals in the UK, to provide sustainable seafood into various school meal programs. Governance and transparency is an executive committee that was established to offer assistance and oversee the CEO. The organization is beneficial because it helps in creating better communication and understanding of the issues that are at hand by various organization, NGOs, and stakeholders that are after sustainable fishing. This decision however, may have some risk because not all stakeholders are willing to accept the terms and conditions put down and thus may lead to disagreements.
Pros and cons
One advantage of the Fund continuing to support the Marine Stewardship Council is that it is going to provide the required funding at the right time. This will ensure that there is continues development of the sustainable fisheries.
The Fund will also be advantageous to the Marine Stewardship council because it does enough research, which will allow proper allocation of resources and maintenance of the this program.
Some of cons however include the lack of trust from the Marine Stewardship Council. Sources indicate that there is lack of credibility, reliability, and truthfulness from the fisheries department, a phenomenon that will hinder its development.
The idea that the Fund needs a lot of information from the Marine Stewardship Council is also a disadvantage because it will require that the council needs to perform a lot of research, a process, which can be costly.
Consistency and quality of fishery certifications is a new fisheries certification that was produced to ensure consistent interpretation of environmental standards of Marine stewardship council. This action is beneficial because it provides requirements that can be achieved by all fisheries including the locals. However, this point of action may be risk since not all fisheries worldwide may be able to adapt it, thus leading to unsustainable fishing.
Environmental performance and stability was established as a back up to the claims of certifying sustainable fisheries. Therefore, environmental performance and sustainability was formed so that the benefits of the environment of marine stewardship council could be assessed. This is done through the creation of incentives for better environmental performance. This point of action is beneficial because if strictly followed can lead to proper environmental performance and sustainability due to the incentives provided. However, the point may be risky if not all fisheries are provided with the incentives to motivate them maintain a healthy environment.
International institute for management development. (2006). Transforming the global fishing
industry: the Marine Stewardship Council at full sail? Switzerland: Press.