Fisheries Program Revisions: Evidence Requirements Framework

Proposed change

The Evidence Requirements Framework has been refined. It now only provides a set of procedures for assessors to follow when evaluating evidence.

Assessors will now use the ERF to consider the accuracy of information provided during an assessment. This will help the assessor determine whether the information is adequate to meet the requirements of the Standard.

This revised process includes considering the objectivity, relevance, completeness, and consistency of information sources, and how any potential for bias is mitigated. This will be used to inform the assessors’ determination of whether that information is adequate to meet the Standard requirements and will apply across all information Performance Indicators in Principles 2 and 3, as well as shark finning scoring issues in Principles 1 and 2. 

This replaces the original purpose of the Framework, which contained both a method for awarding scores, and specific performance requirements for fisheries. All performance requirements – including those for independent monitoring – have been moved from the Toolbox to the appropriate places in the Standard.

Rationale

The original intent of the ERF was to ensure assessments are based on high- quality information. Although the method for evaluating evidence has been revised, this intent has been maintained. 

The original version of the Framework was also found to be overly complex and difficult to apply in practice. The revisions intend to provide clear requirements and ensure it can be applied efficiently, which will also help to reduce assessment time and costs. 

The intent of the original ERF is still maintained, so that assessors are now required to consider the information being used to score a fishery in a structured and transparent way but without the complexity of pseudo-scoring tables.

Proposed change

Revisions have been made to clarify when assessors can apply expert judgement when using the ERF.

This will enable assessors to consider the context of the fishery when determining the adequacy of information required. For example, assessors should require higher quality information or apply a more precautionary approach to fisheries that are likely to have greater impacts on the marine environment.

Rationale

The revisions intend to improve the accessibility of the Standard and ensure that well-managed fisheries are not prevented from achieving certification.

While the proposal provides greater flexibility for assessors, it will still ensure that the quality of evidence is considered regardless of the level of the fishery’s potential environmental impacts.

Proposed change

The MSC is revising the performance levels required of fisheries for monitoring, including the thresholds originally set for independent observation. This will ensure that performance expectations for fisheries are set appropriately in line with practices that are widely accepted and adopted by fisheries management agencies.

The proposals require fisheries operating on the high seas to have a management policy objective for independent observation of at least 20% of fishing events in order to achieve a ‘best practice’ score of SG80. This would not apply to fisheries using pole and line, troll or hand-line gears. 

Fisheries with 100% independent observation policies would be able to achieve a 'state-of-the-art' score of SG100, providing recognition for fisheries with more comprehensive monitoring systems.

The monitoring requirements have also been moved from the Evidence Requirements Framework in the Fisheries Standard Toolbox to the Management Performance Indicators under Principle 2 of the Standard. The requirements will be applied to the management of in-scope species (fish and invertebrates) and out-of-scope species (birds, marine mammals, amphibians and reptiles). The revised Evidence Requirements Framework will continue to be used to guide the assessment of the accuracy of any monitoring in place. 

Rationale

The revisions intend to make sure that requirements for at-sea monitoring and independent observation coverage align with widely adopted best practice. Concerns were raised following publication of Version 3 that the thresholds for monitoring did not consider the diversity of fisheries in the MSC program and capacities for implementing those programmes. Notably, these requirements were considered a particular challenge for highly selective fisheries (e.g., hand-gathering) or those using alternative monitoring approaches.

The new thresholds consider the risks posed by different types of fisheries. Fisheries operating on the high seas are considered higher risk in terms of their potential impacts on the marine environment. Conversely highly selective fisheries, such as those using pole and line or handline gears, are perceived to be lower risk.

To support the development of this proposal, the MSC commissioned an independent review of current practices in independent verification and observer coverage. The report identified that while there are a wide range of approaches and levels for monitoring, RFMOs typically had a target of 20% independent monitoring, serving as a credible baseline for high seas fisheries to meet. A further independent analysis of the information available on fisheries compliance was also carried out.

Proposed change

Revisions have been proposed which require assessors to explicitly consider whether a fishery’s Fins Naturally Attached (FNA) policy or non-retention policy is expected to be effective.

The revised requirements include a definition of what is meant by 'expected to be effective':

• There is adequate information to estimate compliance, using the Evidence Requirements Framework to support this determination; and
• There is no objective and verifiable evidence of non-compliance within the fishery.

Rationale

The MSC is committed to ensuring that shark finning does not take place in certified fisheries. Fisheries remain ineligible for certification if shark finning is taking place. 
The requirement for an FNA or non-retention policy was a significant addition to version 3 of the Standard and the revisions proposed intend to strengthen those requirements by ensuring assessors explicitly consider whether a policy will be effective.

The revisions replace the previous requirement for assessors to determine whether there is a "high degree of certainty that shark finning is not occurring" in the guidepost.  This intends to ensure assessors focus on the information available and compliance with that policy These requirements were previously consulted on as part of the MSC Fisheries Standard Toolbox Review in 2025. 

The proposals also recognise that many fisheries may be formally adopting an FNA or non-retention policy for the first time, and so may not yet have evidence to support compliance. The requirements allow assessors to consider other credible forms of evidence to make their determination, such as the fishery’s compliance with other regulations and policies.