Pakistan: the brain drain dilemma.

Abstract

Criticisms that the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) programme is not delivering on its promise (Nature 467, 28–29 and 531; 2010) are misplaced. After ten years of operation, the MSC certification programme is helping to generate real benefits for the marine environment, including increased stock health, reduced by-catch, established no-take zones, reduced impact on marine habitats and improved scientific understanding through research. For example, as a condition of certification, the South African hake fishery implemented measures that have reduced by-catch of seabirds from 18,000 per year to less than 200. The Dutch Ekofish North Sea plaice fishery has established a voluntary agreement with the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and the North Sea Foundation to minimize impact by closing selected areas to fishing. In British Columbia, certification of the Nass River sockeye-salmon fishery is contingent on implementation of an effective recovery plan for chum salmon stocks. The Norwegian biotech firm Aker BioMarine has undertaken new research and surveys to ensure even better future management of the Antarctic krill resource (in a fishery that, in total, takes less than 1% of the available biomass). There is a proven ecological case for credible third-party certification. The MSC has committed considerable resources to its developing-world programme, in particular by developing the Risk-Based Framework methodology for assessing data-poor fisheries. This is being used in assessments of pole and line and hand-line tuna fisheries in the Maldives, and in the Sian Ka’an and Banco Chinchorro Safaris can help conservation

DOI: 10.1038/4671047c

Cite this paper

@article{Banerjee2010PakistanTB, title={Pakistan: the brain drain dilemma.}, author={Yajnavalka Banerjee}, journal={Nature}, year={2010}, volume={467 7319}, pages={1047} }