Phase 2 Outcomes
During Phase 2, five out of seven companies acknowledged investor engagement letters and provided feedback on their assessments. Six companies held dialogues with investors.
For individual company assessments, please visit our Company Universe.
Phase 2 Outcomes
Traceability is critical for seafood companies and their investors
Seafood companies and their investors face material operational, regulatory, and reputational risks, driven by unsustainable fishing and aquaculture practices, weak traceability, and increasing regulatory scrutiny.
Operationally, overfishing, illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing, and destructive practices such as bottom trawling undermine marine ecosystems and threaten long-term fish stock viability. This depletion increases supply volatility, raises costs, and heightens the risk of supply chain disruption and stranded assets as key fisheries collapse or become restricted. Poor monitoring, data gaps, and unsustainable aquaculture practices – including disease outbreaks and habitat degradation – further exacerbate operational instability and weaken investor confidence.
Regulatory risks are intensifying as governments strengthen requirements on legality, traceability, and sustainability.
Reputationally, links to illegal fishing, labour exploitation, and opaque sourcing also pose significant risks.
223 million tonnes
of fish and seafood were caught from the wild or farmed in 2022, a 123% increase since 1990.15%
of global wild-caught seafood originates from IUU fishing.128,000
fishing workers are in forced labour on remote vessels worldwide.35.5%
of fish stocks are now overfished.60%
of estimated boost to profits if seafood companies implement robust traceability systemsUS$10 billion - US$24 billion
is the potential global financial impact of illegal fishing activities.Uptake of robust traceability commitments has grown since Phase 1
In 2025, Maruha Nichiro and Mitsubishi disclosed new traceability commitments, joining Thai Union and Charoen Pokphand Foods. Leading practice traceability commitments follow the data standards provided by the Global Dialogue on Seafood Traceability (GDST).
Disclosure of traceability implementation strategies and milestones is still lacking
In some cases, the scope of published commitments is too narrow to effectively manage potential risks – focusing on a specific subset of species, rather than entire seafood portfolios.
Companies face multiple challenges in implementing robust traceability, such as a lack of data, a reliance on paper-based rather than digitised data, an ageing workforce in the seafood sector, a lack of technical capacity, and the need for sector-wide collaboration.
More companies are referencing GDST standards in traceability commitments
In 2020, the GDST released the first universal standards and guidelines for interoperable traceability systems. Its Core Normative Standards define Critical Tracking Events – such as fishing, trans-shipment, shipping, receiving, and processing – when data should be collected, as well as the Key Data Elements that record the who, what, when, and where of a product – collectively, the information needed to identify IUU fishing and other seafood-related risks.
Two companies – Thai Union and Mitsubishi – now explicitly reference the GDST in traceability their commitments, up from one company in Phase 1.
Sustainability certifications and traceability systems are complementary but not interchangeable
While it is encouraging that all engaged companies are committed to sourcing at least some certified sustainable seafood, most have supply chains that are neither certified nor traceable, exposing them to potential risks.
A positive development since Phase 1 is that sustainable seafood certification organisations, such as the Aquaculture Stewardship Council and the Marine Stewardship Council, are enhancing their traceability efforts by conducting pilot projects and increasingly enhancing their cooperation with the GDST.