Certification programs have made notable strides in promoting more sustainable practices. Some of the key environmental areas where certification programs have led to positive changes include improvements in feed sourcing and feed management, reduced dependence on antibiotic use and better disease control, better waste treatment and effluent control, and habitat protection. Certification programs have led many producers to adopt improved farming practices, although adoption of practices often leads to procedural compliance without assurance of environmental impact reduction. Overall, the effectiveness of certification programs in reducing environmental impacts has been mixed. Certification has been more successful in reducing direct, farm-level impacts than in addressing the larger, systemic issues affecting entire ecosystems.
Certified production represents only a small portion of total global aquaculture, limiting the overall impact on sustainability. Certification levels for the most farmed species group globally – the carps – are estimated to be <5%, and in China, the world’s largest aquaculture producer, only about 5-10% of domestic aquaculture production is certified. Certification programs focus on large-scale operations or high-value and widely traded species, such as salmon or shrimp. These programs are more prevalent with export-oriented production compared to production of species farmed for domestic consumption or by small-scale farmers.
Certification typically focuses on farm-level practices, but significant environmental impacts may occur elsewhere in the value chain. For example, although there have been efforts to reduce fishmeal and fish oil use in feeds, alternative ingredients like soy also have substantial environmental impacts. Thus, farm-level certification standards have had limited success in promoting truly sustainable feed solutions.
The unit of certification in nearly all programs is the individual farm and certification programs do not comprehensively address the cumulative impacts of multiple farms operating in the same region, such as the effects of nutrient loading (eutrophication), the spread of pathogens causing disease outbreaks, habitat degradation and fragmentation, and biodiversity impacts. Certification programs do not consider the limits of shared natural resources and ecosystem services.
Certification can create incentives for farms to intensify their operations, as certified products often provide access to particular markets or higher market prices. This can lead to more farms seeking certification in already high-density regions, exacerbating environmental pressures and offsetting gains made through certification.
To fully deliver on their promise, certification programs need to evolve by adopting more holistic, inclusive, and adaptive approaches that go beyond individual farm certification to ensure meaningful reductions in environmental impacts. A broader approach requires coordination and collective action by producers, regional-level spatial planning, and other integrated management and policy approaches.