Rationale

A management system is the way in which an organisation manages the inter-related parts of its business in order to achieve its objectives. The level of complexity of the system will depend on each organisation’s specific context, its size, scope and risks of its activities. The management system includes policies, procedures and processes, so that objectives are achieved effectively and efficiently. This includes compliance with ASC requirements; in other words, the management system is applied to all criteria in this standard.

The indicators in this criterion are based on the common quality control adaptive management method which entails a Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA)-cycle^[18][19]. 

Rationale

Within the United Nations (UN) Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) it is recognised that forced, bonded, compulsory labour^[23] and human trafficking^[24] is a persistent problem in many industries^[25] and regions of the world^[26]. The fishing and aquaculture industries are no exception to this^,[27][28]. 

According to recent estimates^[29], 40.3 million people around the world are victims of modern slavery of which 25 million people are victim of forced, bonded or compulsory labour. This includes human trafficking, debt bondage (labour demanded as a means of payment of debt), and more subtle forms of forced labour that force employees to remain in their jobs against their will through other means of threat. As with child labour, poverty is a key driver of forced labour. However, this phenomenon is not limited to low-income countries. In some industries and regions of high-income countries, (migrant) employees can equally become the victims of forced labour.

Relevant reference documents:

1. ILO Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29);
2. ILO Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105);
3. ILO The Protection of Wage Convention, 1949 (No. 95);
4. ILO The Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181).

Rationale

Children^[37] and young workers^[38] are particularly vulnerable to economic exploitation due to their inherent age-related limitations in physical development, knowledge, lack of independence and experience. These vulnerabilities can lead to worst forms of child labour which are to be prioritised for elimination without delay. Employment, and exploitation, of children and young workers occurs globally and in many (if not all) industries^[39]. The aquaculture sector is, unfortunately, no exception to this^[40].

However, not all work done by children should be categorised for elimination. Children’s participation in work that does not negatively affect their health and personal development nor interferes with their schooling, is generally regarded as being something positive. This includes activities such as helping their parents around the home, assisting in a family (farming) business or earning pocket money outside school hours and during school holidays. These non-harmful forms of participation in work contribute to a child’s development and within some contexts to the welfare of their families; it provides them with skills and experience; and helps to prepare them to become productive members of society during their adult life^[41].

Relevant reference documents:

1. ILO Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138);
2. ILO Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182);
3. OHCHR Convention on the Rights of the Child^[42]. 

Rationale

Discrimination^[56] is still a common problem in the workplace. While some of the more blatant forms of discrimination may have faded, many remain or have taken on new or less visible forms. It can perpetuate poverty, stifle development, productivity, and competitiveness, and ignite political instability^[57].

A work relationship should be based on knowledge, skills, and competencies. 

Relevant reference documents:

1. ILO Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100);
2. ILO Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111);
3. ILO Workers with Family Responsibilities Convention, 1981 (No. 156).

Rationale

ILO sets forth, through various Conventions (see below), the principle that workers should be protected from sickness, disease and injury arising from their employment as a basic right. Yet for millions of workers, the reality is very different. The ILO estimates^[60] that 2.78 million people die each year from occupational accidents and work-related diseases. A further 374 million people suffer from non-fatal work-related injuries and illnesses each year, many of these resulting in extended absences from work. It is estimated that 3.94% of the world’s annual Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is lost as a consequence of occupational diseases and accidents. 

Health and safety within the global aquaculture industry, including processing, is still widely overlooked, according to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)^[61].  The world’s estimated 19 million aquaculture workers regularly contend with hazardous^[62] conditions. Some aquaculture workers are highly trained and in secure jobs. However, globally, many aquaculture workers are employed in precarious arrangements and drawn from often vulnerable populations, including women, Indigenous people, children, seasonal workers, migrant workers, rural and remote workers. Many of these risks remain either neglected or unaddressed due to gaps in knowledge, limited independent analyses of prevention and a lack of investment in risk reduction strategies. 

Employers face costly early retirements, loss of skilled staff, absenteeism, and high insurance premiums due to work-related accidents and diseases. Yet many of these work-related accidents and diseases are preventable through the provision of a safe and healthy work environment.

Relevant reference documents:

1. ILO Weekly Rest (Industry) Convention, 1921 (No. 14);
2. ILO Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155);
3. ILO Occupational Health Services Convention, 1985 (No. 161);
4. ILO Chemicals Convention, 1990 (No. 170);
5. ILO Prevention of Major Industrial Accidents Convention, 1993 (No. 174).

Rationale

The right to freedom of association is the right to join a formal or informal group to take collective action towards the employer. Freedom of Association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining is one of the core principles of the ILO “Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work.” (Conventions 87, 98 and 135).  

Collective bargaining^[70] provides a more balanced power relationship for attaining beneficial and productive solutions to potentially conflictual relations between workers and employers, including wage negotiations and working conditions. It provides a means of building trust between the parties through negotiation and the articulation and satisfaction of the different interests of the negotiating partners. Collective bargaining plays this role by promoting peaceful, inclusive and democratic participation of representative workers’ and employers’ organisations.

Relevant reference documents:

1. ILO Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No.87);
2. ILO Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98);
3. ILO Workers’ Representatives Convention, 1971 (No. 135).

Rationale

Employment agreements generally address important aspects of the employment such as wages, benefits, termination procedures, covenants not to compete, and the respective duties and responsibilities of employer and employee. It is a legally binding mutual agreement between two parties, the employer and the employee, and is designed to give both parties security and protection.

Rationale

Within the Universal Declaration of Human Rights^[76], it is stated that “Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself/herself and his/her family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.”

This statement captures the idea that every worker deserves a decent reward for their efforts which is set in a transparent manner and safeguarded through company management. Widespread evidence suggests that some wages within the aquaculture sector are still below national legal minimum wages. In addition, low wages also result in other societal barriers.

Relevant reference documents:

1. ILO Maternity Protection Convention, 1919 (No. 3);
2. ILO Protection of Wages Convention, 1949 (No. 95);
3. ILO Maternity Protection Convention, 1952 (No. 103);
4. ILO Minimum Wage Fixing Convention, 1970 (No. 131);
5. ILO Maternity Protection Convention, 2000 (No. 183).

Note: Given the complexities related to determining an applicable Living Wage^[81], and defining the pathway to reach it, ASC is engaged in broader, cross-cutting industry, discussions to develop Living-Wage Indicators. This is in line with the intent as set out by the original Aquaculture Dialogues. It is envisioned that the Living Wage will become part of the ASC Feed Standard into the future.

Rationale

Despite the regulation of working time being one of the oldest concerns of labour legislation^[82], excessive working hours are still a widespread issue in many industries and regions. 

In many parts of the world, there is a significant link between low wages and excessive working time. Workers subject to extensive overtime can suffer consequences in their work-life balance and are subject to higher fatigue-related accident rates.   

ILO standards on working time provide the framework for regulating hours of work, daily and weekly rest periods, and annual holidays which serve to promote higher productivity while safeguarding workers’ physical and mental health. 

Relevant reference documents:

1. ILO Hours of Work (Industry) Convention, 1919 (No. 1);
2. ILO Weekly Rest (Industry) Convention, 1921 (No. 14);
3. ILO Holidays with Pay Convention (revisited), 1970 (No. 132);
4. ILO Night Work Convention, 1990 (No. 171);
5. ILO The Safety and Health in Agriculture Convention, 2001 (No. 184);
6. ILO Recommendation Reduction of Hours of Work (Recommendation 116).

For employees^[83] aged 18, or higher:

For young employees:^[88]

For children^[92] conducting light work not yet classified as young employee:

Rationale

Disciplinary practices^[96] are not covered by a specific ILO Convention but there are several UN agreements (see below) that collectively establish an international norm for disciplinary practices. The latter are intended to course-correct the behaviour or performance of workers, as there is a risk that this could be done in an unfair or degrading manner.

Despite not being embedded in an ILO Convention, most of the UN member states have ratified these treaties, indicating their commitment to abolish any practice that may compromise or damage an individual’s physical and mental well-being. In addition, many countries have specific national legislation making abuse in the workplace a criminal offense. 

Aiming to protect both the dignity and the physical and mental health of any individual, these instruments strive to deliver an effective and consistent method of dealing with disciplinary and performance matters. Improving motivation, establishing and carrying out a constructive disciplinary process is a key part of responsible human resource management. 

Relevant reference documents:

1. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948);
2. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966);
3. Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1975).

Rationale

Grievances^[97] and conflicts are an inevitable part of employment relationships.  Worker grievance mechanisms^[98] are also called ‘dispute’, ‘complaints’ or ‘accountability’ mechanisms and offer a system in which both the worker and the employer have the possibility to effectively address a workplace problem^[99]. The latter can for instance relate to disputes between individuals as well as to workplace condition complaints.

When implemented effectively, these systems facilitate dialogue between parties before – rather than in reaction to – disputes. 

Relevant reference documents:

1. ILO The Examination of Grievances Recommendation, 1967 (No. 130).

Rationale

Within the United Nations (UN) Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) it is recognised that everyone has the right to a standard of living (including housing) which is adequate for the health and well-being of themselves and their family. In many sectors, including in feed production, workers can reside for a period of time in accommodation provided by the employer. This is especially the case when workplaces are remote or where workers cannot commute between shifts due to distances or other logistical challenges.

As workers in these situations are not always able to find alternatives, the accommodation provided by the employer must be safe, decent and hygienic.

Relevant reference document(s):

1. ILO Workers’ Housing Recommendation, 1961 (No. 115).

Rationale

Feed industry operations often form an important part of the economic backbone of the (often remote) communities in which they are located. At the same time as providing employment opportunities, conflicting activities or interests between the industry’s operation and local communities can lead to tensions and other negative impacts. These can for example revolve around siting of operations in relationship to communities, and potential impacts from emissions such as noise, smell, dust, as well as impacts from increased traffic, etc.

This Criterion aims to make the UoC aware of its impact on the neighbouring community and requires the UoC to engage in a constructive manner.

Rationale

Many of the world’s resources are located on land owned or controlled by Indigenous and tribal peoples^[104]. The UN estimates that there are over 370 million Indigenous and tribal peoples living in over 90 countries^[105]. This means businesses are frequently in close contact with Indigenous and tribal peoples, and improving these relationships is becoming increasingly important. 

Historically, many Indigenous and tribal peoples have suffered from abuse, discrimination, and marginalisation, and this continues today in many areas. As a result, many Indigenous and tribal peoples live in poverty and poor health; and their cultures, languages and ways of life are threatened. Indigenous and tribal peoples comprise five per cent of the world’s population, yet they make up 15 per cent of the world’s poor and one-third of the world’s extremely poor^[106]. In many areas, their average life expectancy is shorter than non-Indigenous people^[107]. Facing these realities, Indigenous and tribal peoples are often particularly vulnerable to the negative impacts of commercial development and business activities^[108].

Compounded by the fact that Indigenous and tribal peoples are often an integral part of aquaculture operations’ ‘local communities’, businesses have an opportunity to involve Indigenous and tribal peoples in business ventures as owners, suppliers, contractors and employees. This can contribute to the long-term success of projects and help embed the business in the local community.

Relevant reference document(s):

1. ILO Indigenous and Tribal Populations, 1989 (No. 107)
2. ILO Indigenous and Tribal Populations, 1957 (No. 169)

Note: ASC intents to implement Free, Prior and Informed Consent^[113] (FPIC) indicators into a future version of the ASC Feed Standard. Given the complexities related to this topic, ASC is engaged in broader, cross-cutting industry discussions to develop consistent FPIC-indicators.

Rationale

In combination with the Indicators under Criterion 1.1, compliance with environmental regulations represents a fundamental basis for the development of an environmentally responsible aquaculture feed sector.

Rationale

Demand for freshwater is increasing due to a range of factors including changing availability, population growth, urbanisation, income growth and dietary shifts, with agricultural production being the main consumer of water. As such there is growing competition for this precious resource. It is important that feed manufacturers are aware of their water use and act to improve the water efficiency of their production process.  

The source of freshwater (i.e., surface water, ground water) and the local conditions (e.g., rainfall, sensitivity of ecosystems) are very important in determining whether or not the utilisation of this resource is detrimental to the natural environment. As such, water use data should be reported by source.

Rationale

Effective waste management ensures that resources are used in an efficient manner by reducing the amount of materials thrown away unnecessarily. It also ensures that waste containing dangerous substances are disposed of properly and do not cause harm. Feed manufacturers should aim to reduce waste and where this is not possible, find ways to reuse or recycle it. All waste must be stored and disposed of in a safe and responsible manner, with particular care taken for waste that contains substances known to be hazardous to people and the environment.

Rationale

Effluents^[121] created from the production of aquafeeds can create problems for human and environmental health if not managed correctly. Therefore, it is important that feed manufacturers have procedures in place to avoid such incidences from occurring.

Rationale

The energy used in the production of aquafeeds is not only a source of economic costs; it may also contribute to depletion of finite natural resources and emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) and other pollutants from burning of fossil fuels. There is scientific consensus that the global climate is changing and that this is closely related to the rising levels of GHG emissions coming from human activities. Most GHG emissions in aquafeed supply chains occur upstream during production of feed ingredients, including from deforestation for crop production, fertiliser use on fields, and fuel use in fisheries. Direct emissions from feed mills, meanwhile, are typically associated with the provision of energy and particularly the burning of fossil fuels. Therefore, it is important that energy is used as efficiently as possible to minimise the associated economic and environmental costs. The use of alternative sources to fossil fuels is encouraged. Different energy sources have different implications for the environment via both direct emissions from burning of fuels and indirect emissions from electricity generation and mining, refining, and transport of fuels. Therefore, it is important to have the results broken down into specific energy sources, including the share of renewable energy in the mix. Feed manufacturers should play their role in climate change mitigation by measuring the GHG emissions from their direct operations and engaging in activities to reduce these.