Food producers in general have already figured the trend out. Companies leaning on the “natural” and “organic” descriptors have dropped the act. Again, in the vegetable aisle, Mintel notes that between 2008-2011, fruit products carrying the natural/organic label declined by 58 percent, vegetables by 77 percent.

It’s not surprising. If ever there were a non-sensical food trend, it’s organic. Not because food shouldn’t be produced in a safer, more ethical or more environmentally-friendly way, but because the word “organic” has been rendered almost meaningless by all the conflicting definitions. Does anyone even remember the organic seafood debate? Yeah, me neither.

Detractors have pointed out that “organic” doesn’t offer any real promises about food safety, carbon footprint or -- gasp -- the size of the company that produced the food.

A Dartmouth University study published last month found high levels of arsenic in organic brown rice syrup, an ingredient used in a vast amount of organic foods.

“Sustainable” is another troublesome adjective, of course. And the Mintel study offers some insight into how consumers may come to view seafood. While there will never be a world of seafood consumers all buying local (though those lucky enough to have access to local seafood will come to give it preference, for certain), there may be a world much more interested in the provenance of its seafood, as opposed to its eco-credentials.

As sustainability is increasingly “built in” to many of the most popular seafoods across the west, it will no longer be a market differentiator, but as invisible as a kosher symbol, “dolphin safe” dot or bar code.

Let’s call it “map certified” -- if a consumer knows where it comes from, they can get a pretty good idea of what it is. To name a few: Scottish salmon, Icelandic cod, Alaska king crab, Maine lobster and Mexican shrimp. There’s no denying -- they market themselves. And so does a fish caught by a neighbor.

The rise of map-certified seafood