This is part one of a three-part blog series, “Human Rights Due Diligence Snapshots.”
Part 1: The Role of Human Rights Due Diligence in Seafood
Part 2: The Powerful and Necessary Role of Workers in Human Rights Due Diligence
Setting The Scene: Confusion about the Role of Social Certifications and Audits Going Forward
Social auditing and social compliance frameworks were created out of a desire by brands to understand the current state of labor risks, communicate expectations through their supply chains, and ensure continuous improvement and monitoring to mitigate associated brand risks. In seafood, the use of these tools was a natural evolution out of the already established use of eco-certifications as assurance models for end-buyers and brands. When early investigations into labor abuses in 2015 unearthed significant issues in seafood, companies turned to audits and certifications to try to fix things, as many other sectors had done. At the time, the logic seemed sound: increased monitoring would lead to improvements.
As audits and certifications became more widespread, their limitations became apparent. Companies created slightly different, but duplicative requirements, leading to inefficiencies and a high cost and burden of process, which weighed largely on upstream supply chain actors. Many suppliers and producers began doing the minimum to comply in order to maintain or gain entry into the market, creating less impactful efforts. All of this has resulted in fairwashing and distrust of the approach.
Human rights abuses and labor exploitation continue to be well documented in seafood supply chains across the globe despite existing efforts, and regulatory pressure is starting to mandate company action. In response, Human Rights Due Diligence (HRDD) is gaining traction. HRDD is a more comprehensive, cyclical approach, designed to handle the ever-changing and complex nature of seafood. HRDD not only meets increasing regulatory requirements, it also has the potential to build responsible and resilient pathways to sourcing through engagement across supply chains.
Yet, for many companies, the challenge lies in the how. At a theoretical level, businesses know what they should be doing; but it can be challenging to put it into action. One facet of this confusion centers around the role that social certifications and audits should play in HRDD. Some groups advocate abandoning these tools entirely, while others promote them as a ‘silver bullet’ solution. Unsurprisingly, the approach most organizations are now aligning on falls somewhere in the middle. FishWise believes that certifications and social audits can play a role, but only as part of a much broader and more comprehensive human rights due diligence program. Companies should be aware of the financial investment involved and make a conscious determination as to whether this is the best use of their limited resources for social responsibility programs.
Digging into the Controversy: Different Perspectives on Social Certifications and Audits
Many human rights experts have a growing frustration with voluntary compliance models, particularly social certifications and audits. This is linked to multi-sector research highlighting decades of poor implementation practices, including ineffective worker engagement* and inadequate follow-through once issues are raised. Key limitations include:
- Announced audits: An advanced scheduled audit allows abuses to be hidden.
- Limited scope: Subcontracted and migrant workers are often excluded from audits, even though they face heightened risks.
- Risk to workers: Management often monitors communications between auditors and workers, and workers may not share issues for fear of retaliation.
- Snapshot approach: Most audits only provide a point-in-time evaluation that doesn’t address ongoing risks or root causes.
- Conflict of interest: Auditors are typically paid by the companies they evaluate, creating a conflict of interest.
- Resource burdens: The financial and administrative costs of compliance fall disproportionately on producers and processors, straining their ability to participate meaningfully.
- Control of businesses: When a retailer demands certification, this can greatly limit market access for small-scale fishers and less sophisticated processors who cannot afford the resources necessary to manage and pay for this added audit requirement.
- Tick-the-box exercise: This model typically relies on a standardized approach no matter the local dynamic, culture or employee demographic. This lack of nuance combined with a more box-ticking approach does not leave room for meaningful engagement with workers and collaborative problem solving focused on the root cause.
Tying it all Together: What is the Potential Role of Social Certifications and Audits in HRDD?
Acknowledging these limitations in social certifications and audits, we can now turn to the value they provide when they have the proper set of standards, implementation, and governance, and are used as part of a comprehensive HRDD program. To maximize their impact through their implementation, social certifications must:
Keep Workers at the Core
- Incorporate workers and their perspectives, and share results back with them
- Evaluate mechanisms, such as those that enable freedom of association and collective bargaining and the existence of transparent, trusted, and safe grievance mechanisms
- Evaluate risk components specific to migrant or subcontracted workers
- Tie to a clear remediation process and plan that includes tracking of improvements and verification through worker engagement
Support Your Efforts to Take Action within the Local Context
- Take the local context into consideration both in terms of criteria included in standards and in the way audits are undertaken
- Focus on root cause analysis, rather than just surfacing issues
- Partner with on-the-ground NGOs and unions to ensure culturally relevant implementation**
Build off of a Strong Foundation
- Use independent, third-party validation
- Engage in reviews and triangulation processes of supplier self-assessments
- Include enforcement mechanisms for failure to comply
- Include ongoing data collection, rather than simply ‘point in time’ evaluation
- Include public reporting on issues, actions taken, and remedy by the company
- Include liability for auditors and certifiers that play a role in misleading consumers and policymakers—willfully or not—about labor practices***
- Mitigate conflict of interest via auditor pools that companies do not pay directly***
Social audits are most effective at assessing basic and straightforward levels of information, such as the existence of specific processes, and company policies and practices (e.g. code of conduct policy in place, payroll practices up to standard, grievance mechanism in place, anti-retaliation policy in place). Social audits cannot be the only method for assessing the implementation or effectiveness of such policies and practices. That is best determined through worker-informed avenues, such as surveys, interviews, engagement with unions or informal worker organizations and other CSOs, and grievance lines.
- Communicate and train suppliers on expectations for required policies and practices
- Used as a spot check to identify gaps or risks in policies and procedures that need to be rectified
- Support identification and prioritization efforts in high-risk geographies and supply chains that require deeper engagement and resource investment
- Support efforts to monitor improvement in policies and practices
- Bring social performance to the attention of management through ‘point-in-time’ reports
- Create a pattern of regular dialogue and physical presence with actors in the supply chain to emphasize the importance of human rights protection and promotion, and decent work
The reality is that there are quite an array of certifications and audit schemes in the social responsibility space. Several attempts have been made to evaluate and compare the merits of voluntary social certifications and audit processes against each other. These evaluation efforts have revealed where some may be more effective than others and highlight themes of both flaws and best practices. For a fairly up-to-date evaluation of specific certifications and standards in seafood, we can refer you to the HRAS Review Project, which was released in September 2023, and revised in October 2023. Be aware that content and methodologies of certifications are regularly being updated, so do your homework.
To support your company’s efforts, FishWise recently released Human Rights Due Diligence: Fundamentals for Impactful Implementation. In this report, we provide practical guidance specific to seafood, focusing on aspects of HRDD that companies often miss, or struggle to implement. This report is supplemental guidance to FishWise’s free resources on The Roadmap for Improving Seafood Ethics (RISE) platform, designed to guide companies in building responsible supply chains through HRDD. When paired together, you have actionable steps and tools to transform HRDD from a compliance exercise to a dynamic strategy, grounded in three fundamentals for success.
For more direct support, remember to consult with like minded peers, and human rights and social responsibility professionals, including FishWise, who can assist you in the design and implementation of your efforts no matter where your company is on its journey. Remember that you are not alone!