A recent report has found that MSC-certified fisheries work with fishing vessels where incidents of forced labor have been reported by fishermen. The Outlaw Ocean Project documented forced Uyghur labor in ten MSC-certified facilities in China. A 2023 report by a coalition of international environmental non-profit organizations has further critiqued the MSC for its lax environmental standards, lack of labor protections, and deception of consumers. In spite of all this evidence, the MSC continues to fail consumers by allowing them to believe that buying MSC-certified products is the sustainable option when, in reality, the fish coming from MSC-certified facilities were procured and processed in a manner comparable to those originating from non-certified facilities. Certification schemes like the MSC need either to effectively protect workers’ rights and the environment or remove themselves from occupying the space of a more effective alternative, such as a union or worker-driven model.
In November 2024, CAL and the SSA submitted a petition to the FTC to enjoin BAP for its misleading and deceptive advertising practices.
BAP is a third-party certification scheme that claims to certify each step of the aquaculture production chain, including farm, feed, hatcheries, and processing facilities. BAP touts itself as being one of the “easiest ways to know that your seafood was produced in a safe, responsible, and ethical way.” In reality, BAP-certified shrimp production processes are rife with labor and environmental abuses.
CAL’s Consumer Protection Suit Against Rainforest Alliance Dismissed on Procedural Grounds; Case Proceeds Against Hershey
On June 20, the Washington D.C. Superior Court dismissed Corporate Accountability Lab’s (CAL) consumer protection suit against The Rainforest Alliance, Inc. (Rainforest Alliance), an eco-social certifier, for lack of personal jurisdiction. In the same order, the judge refused to grant The Hershey Company’s (Hershey) motion to dismiss the case against them as co-defendants. This post discusses the mixed decision and the significance of the dismissal of claims against Rainforest Alliance.
So-called Sustainability programs are failing cocoa farmers and their families: How Nestlé and Mondelez greenwash – and labor wash – their chocolate products
The West African cocoa industry, where two-thirds of the world’s cocoa is grown, is notorious for its human rights abuses. From hazardous child labor to child trafficking to the poverty wages that farmers earn, little of the cocoa supply chain in West Africa is “fair” or “sustainable.” Yet over the past decade, certification schemes – such as Rainforest Alliance, Fairtrade International, and Fairtrade USA – and so-called sustainability programs – like Mondelez’s Cocoa Life, Nestlé’s Cocoa Plan, Mars’ Cocoa for Generations, and Hershey’s Cocoa For Good – have proliferated.
Certification Schemes: Why Fairtrade International, Rainforest Alliance and Others are Failing Workers and Consumers
These days, if you go into a grocery store, there are numerous labels on food products touting how ethical and sustainable the product is. Yet these certification labels often misrepresent the labor and environmental standards used to produce these products. Certification schemes, such as Fairtrade International, were initially developed to provide workers – often farm workers in rural areas – with increased income, better working conditions, and a steady stream of buyers. Moreover, they signaled to consumers that the products were produced sustainably, without exploiting workers, children, or the environment.