With the proper set of standards, implementation, and governance, voluntary social certifications and social audits can assess basic information, such as the existence of specific processes and company policies and practices (e.g., code of conduct policy, payroll practices, grievance mechanisms, anti-retaliation policy, etc.). You can use them in at least seven ways:

• Communicate with and train suppliers on expectations.
• Spot check gaps and risks in policies and procedures.
• Identify high-risk geographies and supply chains that require more engagement and investment.
• Monitor improvement in policies and practices. 
• Bring social performance to the attention of management through point-in-time reports.
• Emphasize the importance of human rights protection and decent work via regular dialogue and site visits with actors in the supply chain.
• Communicate social performance and company values to the public.

Many human rights experts have expressed growing frustration with voluntary compliance models, particularly social certifications and audits. This frustration is linked to multi-sector research highlighting decades of poor implementation practices, including conflicting standards and governance, ineffective auditing and worker engagement, and inadequate follow-through once issues are raised. The table below highlights the limitations of audits and certifications:

Factors that inhibit the effectiveness of auditing include:

• Announced audits: An audit scheduled in advance 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, so workers may not share issues for fear of retaliation.
• 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 can be great, and often fall disproportionately on producers and processors, straining their ability to participate meaningfully. This approach can also be seen as taking resources away from other approaches that have been proven to be more effective. 
• Control of businesses: When a retailer demands certification, small-scale fishers and less sophisticated processors can be left out if they 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, leaving no room for meaningful engagement with workers and collaborative problem-solving.
• Compliance approach: Top-down, prescriptive programs can create lack of trust and transparency, since human rights abuses are best understood and addressed when actors across the supply chain can speak openly and collaborate with each other.

Audits and certifications are most effective when they are supported by rigorous standards, implementation, and governance. Each certification and audit program is unique. Strong audit and certification programs incorporate various practices, including comprehensive standards, highly trained third-party assessors, the incorporation of seafood worker perspectives, regular unannounced audits, and robust, effective grievance mechanisms. To maximize their impact, audits and social certifications must cover two core areas:

• Keep workers at the core
  • Incorporate workers and their perspectives and share results with them.
  • Engage with a union or other worker-led association, if one is in place, since unions are led by workers and represent 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. 
  • Commit to a clear remediation process and plan that includes tracking of improvements and verification through worker engagement.

• Act within the local context
  • Consider the local context, both in terms of criteria included in standards and in the way audits are undertaken.
  • Focus on root cause analysis, rather than just raising issues.
  • Partner with on-the-ground NGOs and unions to ensure culturally relevant implementation.

Auditors should be fully trained in human rights auditing and in how to conduct social compliance audits. If the auditor is evaluating a particular social standard, they should be accredited in that standard. More broadly, auditors participating in the Association of Professional Social Compliance Auditors (APSCA) will be better suited to engage with workers while supporting worker privacy. You should also mitigate conflict of interest via auditor pools that companies do not pay directly and are instead paid for by a third party or by a different actor in the supply chain.

Be prepared to handle issues that are uncovered by the audit or certification and make a commitment to effective remediation. There are eight actions to help you perform a good audit:

• Develop an action plan in consultation with workers who will be impacted by it.
• Engage in reviews and triangulation of supplier self-assessments.
• Include enforcement mechanisms for failure to comply.
• Include ongoing data collection, rather than simply point in time evaluation.
• Provide resources and training to suppliers and staff to prevent recurrence.
• 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.
• Validate any change in work conditions through direct engagement with workers or measures like grievance mechanisms or surveys.

With human and labor rights a new focal point in responsible seafood, a plethora of social responsibility-focused certifications, standards, and schemes have emerged. If you plan to use certifications as a tool in your HRDD program, it is important to understand the standards and governance of the various systems.

Several attempts have been made to evaluate and compare the merits of voluntary social certifications and audit processes against each other. For a fairly up-to-date evaluation of specific certifications and standards in seafood and a comprehensive list of characteristics for effective programs, see the HRAS Review Project, which was released in September 2023 and revised in October 2023. 

The seafood-specific social benchmark tool created by the Global Seafood Sustainability Initiative (GSSI) in collaboration with the Sustainable Supply Chain Initiative (SSCI) of The Consumer Goods Forum (CGF) is an additional resource featuring different benchmarked audit and certification options for the seafood sector. 

Certification content and methodologies are regularly being updated, so do your own evaluation of the options available. As a best practice, take time to understand the components addressed by a certification’s standard, how it is implemented, and the parts of the supply chain that it covers.

No certification alone can provide the supply chain information you need for robust due diligence, so you will have to identify the additional mechanisms for engagement, verification, and enforcement that you need. Reference the three RISE Foundations and the Roadmap for a clear, step-by-step path to building and strengthening your HRDD program. 

As you create your program, keep in mind that the most meaningful and promising third party verification and monitoring systems are worker-led. Look for opportunities to enable worker-led efforts. Invite worker participation, particularly when assessing risk, verifying issues and improvements, and crafting solutions.  

For additional tips, see the FishWise special report, Human Rights Due Diligence: Fundamentals for Impactful Implementation in Seafood. It highlights three fundamental strategies that companies often miss, but that will add depth and rigor to your process. This report is based on interviews with over 30 stakeholders, including human and labor rights experts, seafood industry representatives, advisors to worker organizations and trade unions, seafood workers, and community-level professionals from sourcing communities.