A key element of good stewardship practices in the seafood industry is managing the impacts of operations on ecosystems. This measurement area looks at what companies do to avoid, reduce and/ or mitigate negative impacts.

Thai Union Group ranks first in the ecosystems measurement area. The company clearly seeks to mitigate potential adverse impact on ecosystems by cooperating with its suppliers, participating in multi-stakeholder initiatives and demonstrating its contributions to these projects. BioMar Group and Mowi rank second and third in ecosystems for their high levels of transparency around the environmental impacts resulting from both their operations and business activities across their supply chains. In fourth and fifth place are Labeyrie Fine Foods, with its detailed approach to address the company’s impact on the ecosystem through its sourcing, and Parlevliet & Van der Plas, with clear measures in place to reduce the impacts of its fishing activities. The other companies in the benchmark recognise their responsibilities in avoiding harm to sensitive ecosystems and vulnerable species, as well as in removing illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fish from their own operations and across their supply chains. However, they are not as transparent about their overall impact on the ecosystem. Moreover, companies in the bottom half of the ranking often lack detailed measures to address and mitigate the risks on IUU fish and bycatch in wild-capture fisheries or do not provide clear evidence of how they take into account the environmental impacts resulting from their aquaculture operations.

Ranking overview

30 companies

Total score out of 5 Governance and management of stewardship practices out of 5 Stewardship of the supply chain out of 5 Ecosystems out of 5 Human rights and working conditions out of 5 Local communities out of 5
1 Thai Union Group
Total score 2.70 /5
Ecosystems 2.55
Governance and management of stewardship practices 4.59
Stewardship of the supply chain 3.30
Ecosystems 2.55
Human rights and working conditions 1.92
Local communities 2.05
2 BioMar Group
Total score 2.22 /5
Ecosystems 2.53
Governance and management of stewardship practices 3.92
Stewardship of the supply chain 3.49
Ecosystems 2.53
Human rights and working conditions 0.94
Local communities 0.07
3 Mowi
Total score 2.42 /5
Ecosystems 2.46
Governance and management of stewardship practices 3.55
Stewardship of the supply chain 3.02
Ecosystems 2.46
Human rights and working conditions 1.75
Local communities 1.64
4 Labeyrie Fine Foods
Total score 1.36 /5
Ecosystems 2.44
Governance and management of stewardship practices 1.09
Stewardship of the supply chain 1.61
Ecosystems 2.44
Human rights and working conditions 0.29
Local communities 0.00
5 Parlevliet & Van der Plas
Total score 1.72 /5
Ecosystems 2.26
Governance and management of stewardship practices 2.17
Stewardship of the supply chain 1.65
Ecosystems 2.26
Human rights and working conditions 1.19
Local communities 0.85
6 Austevoll Seafood ASA
Total score 1.70 /5
Ecosystems 2.20
Governance and management of stewardship practices 2.20
Stewardship of the supply chain 1.80
Ecosystems 2.20
Human rights and working conditions 1.05
Local communities 0.85
7 SalMar
Total score 1.50 /5
Ecosystems 2.19
Governance and management of stewardship practices 1.84
Stewardship of the supply chain 1.70
Ecosystems 2.19
Human rights and working conditions 0.73
Local communities 0.25
8 FCF Co., LTD.
Total score 1.53 /5
Ecosystems 2.09
Governance and management of stewardship practices 2.65
Stewardship of the supply chain 1.73
Ecosystems 2.09
Human rights and working conditions 0.46
Local communities 0.70
9 Nutreco (Skretting)
Total score 1.86 /5
Ecosystems 2.06
Governance and management of stewardship practices 3.71
Stewardship of the supply chain 2.08
Ecosystems 2.06
Human rights and working conditions 0.78
Local communities 1.59
10 Tri Marine Group
Total score 1.19 /5
Ecosystems 2.05
Governance and management of stewardship practices 1.00
Stewardship of the supply chain 1.05
Ecosystems 2.05
Human rights and working conditions 0.51
Local communities 0.32
11 Mitsubishi Corporation
Total score 1.79 /5
Ecosystems 1.70
Governance and management of stewardship practices 1.63
Stewardship of the supply chain 2.10
Ecosystems 1.70
Human rights and working conditions 1.87
Local communities 1.43
12 Bumble Bee Foods
Total score 1.27 /5
Ecosystems 1.67
Governance and management of stewardship practices 1.50
Stewardship of the supply chain 2.04
Ecosystems 1.67
Human rights and working conditions 0.36
Local communities 0.38
13 Cargill Aqua Nutrition
Total score 1.87 /5
Ecosystems 1.63
Governance and management of stewardship practices 3.15
Stewardship of the supply chain 2.91
Ecosystems 1.63
Human rights and working conditions 1.19
Local communities 1.08
14 Charoen Pokphand Foods
Total score 2.32 /5
Ecosystems 1.58
Governance and management of stewardship practices 3.92
Stewardship of the supply chain 3.92
Ecosystems 1.58
Human rights and working conditions 2.05
Local communities 0.74
15 Nueva Pescanova
Total score 2.04 /5
Ecosystems 1.53
Governance and management of stewardship practices 3.71
Stewardship of the supply chain 2.59
Ecosystems 1.53
Human rights and working conditions 1.66
Local communities 1.95
16 Nomad Foods
Total score 1.51 /5
Ecosystems 1.37
Governance and management of stewardship practices 3.30
Stewardship of the supply chain 2.47
Ecosystems 1.37
Human rights and working conditions 0.72
Local communities 0.25
17 Royal Greenland
Total score 1.33 /5
Ecosystems 1.20
Governance and management of stewardship practices 1.63
Stewardship of the supply chain 1.72
Ecosystems 1.20
Human rights and working conditions 1.19
Local communities 1.08
18 High Liner Foods
Total score 0.84 /5
Ecosystems 1.09
Governance and management of stewardship practices 1.54
Stewardship of the supply chain 1.13
Ecosystems 1.09
Human rights and working conditions 0.23
Local communities 0.13
19 Dongwon Group
Total score 1.17 /5
Ecosystems 1.01
Governance and management of stewardship practices 2.37
Stewardship of the supply chain 0.88
Ecosystems 1.01
Human rights and working conditions 1.52
Local communities 0.25
20 Kyokuyo
Total score 0.76 /5
Ecosystems 0.84
Governance and management of stewardship practices 1.71
Stewardship of the supply chain 0.37
Ecosystems 0.84
Human rights and working conditions 0.71
Local communities 0.47
21 Nippon Suisan Kaisha (Nissui)
Total score 1.19 /5
Ecosystems 0.83
Governance and management of stewardship practices 3.40
Stewardship of the supply chain 1.62
Ecosystems 0.83
Human rights and working conditions 0.80
Local communities 0.38
22 Maruha Nichiro
Total score 0.83 /5
Ecosystems 0.65
Governance and management of stewardship practices 1.71
Stewardship of the supply chain 1.11
Ecosystems 0.65
Human rights and working conditions 0.78
Local communities 0.13
23 Cooke
Total score 0.41 /5
Ecosystems 0.64
Governance and management of stewardship practices 0.42
Stewardship of the supply chain 0.20
Ecosystems 0.64
Human rights and working conditions 0.12
Local communities 0.69
24 Marubeni Corporation
Total score 0.87 /5
Ecosystems 0.48
Governance and management of stewardship practices 1.07
Stewardship of the supply chain 0.83
Ecosystems 0.48
Human rights and working conditions 1.42
Local communities 0.75
25 Pacific Seafood Group
Total score 0.49 /5
Ecosystems 0.46
Governance and management of stewardship practices 0.25
Stewardship of the supply chain 1.29
Ecosystems 0.46
Human rights and working conditions 0.08
Local communities 0.25
26 Wales Group (Sea Value & Sea Wealth)
Total score 0.34 /5
Ecosystems 0.45
Governance and management of stewardship practices 0.10
Stewardship of the supply chain 0.37
Ecosystems 0.45
Human rights and working conditions 0.40
Local communities 0.00
27 Trident Seafoods
Total score 0.23 /5
Ecosystems 0.41
Governance and management of stewardship practices 0.25
Stewardship of the supply chain 0.20
Ecosystems 0.41
Human rights and working conditions 0.00
Local communities 0.25
28 Red Chamber Group
Total score 0.23 /5
Ecosystems 0.23
Governance and management of stewardship practices 0.25
Stewardship of the supply chain 0.55
Ecosystems 0.23
Human rights and working conditions 0.04
Local communities 0.00
29 Shanghai Fisheries Group Co., LTD.
Total score 0.06 /5
Ecosystems 0.14
Governance and management of stewardship practices 0.10
Stewardship of the supply chain 0.00
Ecosystems 0.14
Human rights and working conditions 0.00
Local communities 0.00
30 Yokohama Reito (Yokorei)
Total score 0.12 /5
Ecosystems 0.00
Governance and management of stewardship practices 0.00
Stewardship of the supply chain 0.27
Ecosystems 0.00
Human rights and working conditions 0.00
Local communities 0.63