For decades, sustainability certifications like the Marine Stewardship Council’s (MSC) blue tick and the Aquaculture Stewardship Council’s (ASC) mark have been marketed as the gold standard for responsible seafood – a way for producers to earn market access, differentiate their products, and build consumer trust. But recent U.S. trade actions have revealed an uncomfortable reality: when politics takes over, certification no longer matters.

In April 2025, the Trump administration imposed sweeping new tariffs on seafood imports – 10% across the board, with higher rates for key exporters like China. The rationale centered on protecting American jobs and trade balance, not on rewarding environmental performance or traceability. Certified products received no preferential treatment; an MSC-labeled tuna was taxed the same as an uncertified one.

The result? A clear message that sustainability labels hold little weight in hard policy discussions. Certification, once seen as a driver of responsible behavior and a bridge to better markets, played no role in tariff deliberations. Instead, the U.S. leaned on its own regulatory tools, such as the Seafood Import Monitoring Program (SIM), which focuses narrowly on documentation rather than private eco-labels.

Industry reactions have been pragmatic, not philosophical. Major retailers and processors have focused on adapting supply chains and managing costs rather than defending certification as a trade asset. The National Fisheries Institute has lobbied for tariff relief on competitiveness grounds, not sustainability. Meanwhile, certification bodies have stayed largely silent – promoting their programs in general terms but avoiding direct engagement on the tariff issue.

The absence of advocacy speaks volumes. Certification has failed to secure policy recognition or trade advantages. It remains a voluntary, market-facing tool – useful for branding, but powerless in the geopolitical arena. As one analyst from FishProf noted, “If certification can’t influence trade policy, what is it really for?”

There are rare exceptions: Saudi Arabia has begun formally recognizing BAP and ASC certification as part of its seafood import criteria – linking eco-labels to regulatory trust and market access. But globally, such policies are the exception, not the rule.

The implications are serious. Certification cannot guarantee access, shape tariffs, or meaningfully alter trade outcomes. If governments ignore sustainability labels in their biggest market interventions, the industry may need to rethink the model altogether.

As FishProf concludes, “The time for feel-good labels is over. Real progress will come from transparent, data-driven systems that prove sustainability through verified performance – not marketing.”

The challenge ahead for aquaculture and seafood is clear: move beyond certification as symbolism, and build sustainability into the very fabric of production, oversight, and trade.