S in place. Reputation-based incentives can also apply to businesses and

S in place. Reputation-based incentives can also apply to businesses and industry, where reputation affects building and maintaining a consumer base and supply chain. An example of reputationbased incentives that also aim to improve fisheries sustainability in the business sector has been the pledge by large retailers to source only seafood products certified as sustainable. In 2006 Walmart, the world’s largest retailer, announced it would transition toward all MSC-certified seafood in North American markets by 2011 (69). Walmart later added fisheries “actively working toward certification or involved in a Fisheries Improvement Project” (70). Subsequently, other large fish sellers, such as Costco, Whole Foods, and Target followed suit. Now more than 80 of North American retail and institutional food service enterprises have seafood sustainability policies in partnership with environmental nongovernment organizations (71). Such decisions by retailers are often motivated by the desire to promote a reputation as environmentally responsible. Independent certification provides credibility with consumers. Although these decisions reflect an emerging demand for sustainable products, reputation is an important incentive behind the transition to offering certified seafood products. Previous studies have shown that obtaining higher prices was not a major motivation behind decisions to carry certified products (72). Regardless of the efficacy of sustainable seafood certification programs (some of which have been controversial; see, for example, ref. 73), the adoption of certified seafood by retailers stems from to the desire of businesses to maintain reputation and gain competitive advantage (72). In addition, governments are increasingly requiring traceability of fishery products, strengthening PSMA efforts, and enhancing transparency for seafood buyers. Suppliers of sustainable seafood have struggled to keep up with overall demand, and these shortfalls could worsen with climate impacts (74).COLLOQUIUM PAPERAt the national level, desire to leave a legacy can motivate leaders to take action. For example, designating large marine reserves might be motivated in part by self-image and legacy considerations. Marine reserves (fully protected areas) have clear ecological benefits, provide strong economic and social benefits (e.g., potential for increased fisheries yields, opportunities for ecotourism, and protection of cultural heritage) (14, 76, 77), and can be seen as a gift to future generations. However, because they are generally lobbied strongly against by powerful extractive industries (fishing, oil, gas, and mining), their designation has been very difficult. Despite calls by the conservation community for increased ocean protection, the global area protected remained at 1 of the ocean for decades, with only 0.1 as strongly protected (17). Scientific documentation of strong benefits from fully protected areas and increasing recognition of degradation of ocean ecosystems changed the dynamic and led to sophisticated campaigns to create large strongly protected areas. Once a few nations created large strongly protected areas and were widely praised for doing so, momentum grew for a new era of designating large, remote, strongly-to-fully protected marine areas. Many nations, including Chile, New Zealand, Seychelles, Ecuador, Palau, the MS023 site A-836339 solubility United Kingdom, Cuba, Russia, and the United States have committed to protecting more of their EEZs, largely thr.S in place. Reputation-based incentives can also apply to businesses and industry, where reputation affects building and maintaining a consumer base and supply chain. An example of reputationbased incentives that also aim to improve fisheries sustainability in the business sector has been the pledge by large retailers to source only seafood products certified as sustainable. In 2006 Walmart, the world’s largest retailer, announced it would transition toward all MSC-certified seafood in North American markets by 2011 (69). Walmart later added fisheries “actively working toward certification or involved in a Fisheries Improvement Project” (70). Subsequently, other large fish sellers, such as Costco, Whole Foods, and Target followed suit. Now more than 80 of North American retail and institutional food service enterprises have seafood sustainability policies in partnership with environmental nongovernment organizations (71). Such decisions by retailers are often motivated by the desire to promote a reputation as environmentally responsible. Independent certification provides credibility with consumers. Although these decisions reflect an emerging demand for sustainable products, reputation is an important incentive behind the transition to offering certified seafood products. Previous studies have shown that obtaining higher prices was not a major motivation behind decisions to carry certified products (72). Regardless of the efficacy of sustainable seafood certification programs (some of which have been controversial; see, for example, ref. 73), the adoption of certified seafood by retailers stems from to the desire of businesses to maintain reputation and gain competitive advantage (72). In addition, governments are increasingly requiring traceability of fishery products, strengthening PSMA efforts, and enhancing transparency for seafood buyers. Suppliers of sustainable seafood have struggled to keep up with overall demand, and these shortfalls could worsen with climate impacts (74).COLLOQUIUM PAPERAt the national level, desire to leave a legacy can motivate leaders to take action. For example, designating large marine reserves might be motivated in part by self-image and legacy considerations. Marine reserves (fully protected areas) have clear ecological benefits, provide strong economic and social benefits (e.g., potential for increased fisheries yields, opportunities for ecotourism, and protection of cultural heritage) (14, 76, 77), and can be seen as a gift to future generations. However, because they are generally lobbied strongly against by powerful extractive industries (fishing, oil, gas, and mining), their designation has been very difficult. Despite calls by the conservation community for increased ocean protection, the global area protected remained at 1 of the ocean for decades, with only 0.1 as strongly protected (17). Scientific documentation of strong benefits from fully protected areas and increasing recognition of degradation of ocean ecosystems changed the dynamic and led to sophisticated campaigns to create large strongly protected areas. Once a few nations created large strongly protected areas and were widely praised for doing so, momentum grew for a new era of designating large, remote, strongly-to-fully protected marine areas. Many nations, including Chile, New Zealand, Seychelles, Ecuador, Palau, the United Kingdom, Cuba, Russia, and the United States have committed to protecting more of their EEZs, largely thr.