MSZzzzzz

When did sustainability get so boring?

The media is always being accused of sensationalism, and while I could spend the rest of this column defending my profession, I’ll instead admit right up front that sensationalism is, indeed, very much a part of journalism. There are extremely varying degrees of this, mind you, but in general, the world would be much less informed if a story wasn’t well told, and a good headline is the first part of a good story. So it's frustrating when the really sensational stories just aren't as good as they once were.

Sustainability is suffering from a mid-life crisis. Like all of us, it’s gained some weight, has a bit of trouble getting going in the morning. It’s got bills, mouths to feed, and it just generally doesn’t feel as peppy as it once did.

Need proof? Here’s a snippet from the latest go-round of the back-and-forth exchanges debating the Russian pollock fishery's suitability for Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) certification:

"Once the Synthesis model has re-constructed the historical time series of catch, population biomass and fishing mortality, uncertainty about these series was estimated through a Monte Carlo sampling process in which the standard deviation around the predicted catch at age is assumed to be 0.3 based on studies elsewhere..."
Where are the Greenpeace tuna warriors rappelling from the ceiling? Where are the blimps? The banners? Where is Stinky Fish?

It’s a sad day for a journalist when a topic once so ripe with drama becomes procedural and stuffy, but I’ll get over it. The fact that sustainability is no longer fun is actually a good thing. It means that it is no longer novel. Taking care of the oceans is now a part of the story most people tell their children. Consumers don’t need the same barrage of outside messages reminding them they need to think about their choices.

Now, this is potentially troublesome for a lot of the NGO community. While many people in the sustainable seafood business are well-intentioned, the overwhelming majority of them do not possess either fisheries science degrees, or field experience in fisheries management. Even fewer have had to sit through the dull drone of a fisheries policy meeting. That means that the next phase of sustainability – employing best practices at the ground level – won’t be for just anybody anymore.

Don’t get me wrong – public awareness of sustainable seafood is crucial, and campaigning is a big part of that. And, let’s face it, protests are often the best parties. But the colorful campaigns mounted by Greenpeace and other NGOs – while they have played a role in bringing about some of the changes we’ve witnessed over the past decade – just aren’t needed the way they used to be. That’s why sustainability rankings are no longer ground-shaking. It’s why funding has dried up for dumping fish on doorsteps or flying blimps over office buildings.

It’s no longer about consumers making the right choice. It’s about the right choices being made available to them. Many of the seafood companies that make the world go ‘round – whether they like it or not – have figured out that it’s very much their responsibility not to just get involved with eco-labels, but with actual on-the-ground change. And that can be dull, arduous, sleep-inducing work.

Russian Alaska pollock’s long, tough slog toward MSC certification may be the last truly dramatic sustainable seafood story (apart from Alaska salmon, of course). There are plenty of incremental steps still to be taken, and there are still companies out there that will find new and unusual ways to tear down their image of corporate responsibility, but the days of the headline-grabbing sustainable seafood protest is over.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I need a nap.

Comments? E-mail:drew.cherry@intrafish.com
(Copyright)
Published 22 July 2013, 13:19Updated 9 May 2016, 17:44