An evaluation of Japanese seafood companies and future challenges: how is SeaBOS contributing?

SeaBOS – origin and vision

SeaBOS (Seafood Business for Ocean Stewardship) is a science-industry collaboration established in 2016, bringing together eight of the world’s largest seafood companies and a team of independent scientists. The initiative was created to explore the potential for these companies to lead a transformation towards the sustainable use of marine resources. Four Japanese companies, Maruha Nichiro, Nissui, Kyokuyo^*1, and Cermaq (a subsidiary of Mitsubishi Corporation) are current or former members of SeaBOS. Executives from these companies, along with scientists involved in the initiative, have also regularly participated in the Sustainable Seafood Summit.

The SeaBOS initiative is grounded in a scientific hypothesis: that “keystone actors,” a small group of corporations with extensive supply chains and exercising significant market influence, could drive a transformation towards ocean stewardship through their leadership, and in doing so, trigger cascading changes across the entire seafood industry. 

While the SeaBOS initiative has been closely studied and the subject of multiple papers tracking its formation and evolution, the central question – whether it has sparked cascading change – has not previously been scientifically tested. In a newly published paper, we present the first scientific analysis of how SeaBOS may be influencing the broader Japanese seafood sector and evaluate whether cascading changes are beginning to emerge.

This summary is based on a scientific article published in Marine Policy, authored by members of the science team engaging with the SeaBOS initiative. For more information about SeaBOS, please visit the website. The peer-reviewed research article is available open access here:

Fig.1. From the concept of keystone species to the theory of keystone actors. The figure is sourced from the SeaBOS secretariat, and designed by Azote. 

The Japanese seafood industry from an international perspective

The Japanese seafood industry possesses several distinctive characteristics from an international perspective. First, Japan has a significant influence on the global seafood market, maintaining one of the highest per capita seafood consumption rates worldwide^*2. Second, unlike North American and European markets, where sustainability initiatives are largely consumer-driven, in Japan, corporations are the primary promoters of such initiatives^*3. This feature can be attributed to Japan’s relatively low consumer awareness and large number of large-scale companies. Third, more of the world’s 100 largest seafood companies are headquartered here (17) than in any other country in the world^*4.

Despite this substantial global industry presence, the Japanese seafood sector has faced criticism for lagging behind in sustainability practices. For example, the Seafood Stewardship Index (SSI) published by the World Benchmarking Alliance reported that all seven Japanese companies assessed – including Nissui, Marubeni, Maruha Nichiro, Mitsubishi Corporation, Kyokuyo, Yokohama Reito, and OUG Holdings – have consistently ranked in the bottom half since 2019^*5. Japanese companies have particularly underperformed in traceability compared to their European and American counterparts.

Changes and challenges in the sustainability reporting of Japanese seafood companies over the past decade

In our study, we selected Japan’s 17 largest seafood companies as our sample and analyzed their performance over a 10-year period. Our initial observation revealed remarkable diversity among the 17 sample companies. Although all of the companies have in common that they were founded more than 70 years old, they differ significantly in terms of sales volume, number of employees, business focus, and Stock Exchange categories. For instance, while some companies primarily engage in fisheries, others are engaged in a wide range of business sectors. Therefore, we proceeded by classifying the 17 companies into four groups, as shown in Table 1, and conducted our analysis according to two main categories: (1) transparency and traceability of sustainability reporting, and (2) the six SeaBOS priority issues related to sustainable seafood practices. 

Table 1. Four classifications among the 17 largest seafood companies in Japan

Figure 2 illustrates the companies’ performance in transparency and traceability regarding sustainability reporting, comparing the four groups presented in Table 1. In this analysis, transparency and traceability were evaluated through four perspectives: (1) publication types of sustainability reporting, (2) implementation of materiality assessment, (3) implementation of traceability assessment, and (4) adherence to guidelines such as GRI standards.

As the figure shows, the large trading companies have consistently published sustainability reports with high transparency and traceability standards from an early stage. This practice likely stems partly from their international operations and corresponding pressure from overseas investors and business partners to disclose non-financial information. Meanwhile, we see that the three SeaBOS member companies rapidly strengthened their sustainability reporting after 2016, when SeaBOS was established and joint commitments were announced among member companies. Following their lead, the large food companies also began to strengthen their sustainability reporting around 2020. In contrast, domestic seafood companies still remain in the early stages of sustainability reporting. This is partially due to less stringent requirements from the Japanese legal system, which primarily requires only first-category companies listed on the Stock Exchange to disclose non-financial information. However, in recent years, five of the six domestic seafood companies have established basic environmental policies, and all six have obtained MSC-CoC certification, indicating that sustainability efforts are gradually being promoted even among domestic fishery companies.

Legend for the figures

Figure 2. Comparison between the four classifications: (A) Three SeaBOS members, (B) Large trading companies, (C) Large food companies,
and (D) domestic seafood companies.

In addition, our paper analyzes the companies’ performance across the six SeaBOS priority issues: (1) illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing; (2) modern slavery and respect for human rights; (3) biodiversity and endangered species; (4) anti-microbial resistance; (5) marine plastics; and (6) climate change. Among varied trends in each category, large trading companies generally demonstrated more advanced commitments to human rights and climate change. In contrast, the three SeaBOS member companies have long shown strength in addressing IUU fishing and marine plastic issues (see Figure 3). Across all company groups, engagement with biodiversity and endangered species and anti-microbial resistance remains in early developmental stages. In this context, the seafood resource surveys recently conducted by Nissui and Maruha Nichiro on all their handled species represent extremely valuable initiatives for fisheries resource management and endangered species protection (see these links, Nissui:, and Maruha Nichiro:. We hope other companies will implement similar surveys in the future.

Figure 3. Changes in reporting on IUU fishing (left) and modern slavery and human rights (right).

Discussing the evidence of stewardship in the Japanese seafood industry

Our results demonstrate that Japanese companies have made significant sustainability progress in a relatively short period, despite their reputation for lagging behind in terms of sustainability performance. The analysis suggests that the SeaBOS initiative has positively influenced member companies by promoting and accelerating their sustainability disclosures and efforts in the seafood sector, positioning them as front-runners in the Japanese seafood industry. The results also indicate that other companies are gradually moving towards similar transparency standards as SeaBOS members, suggesting an industry-wide shift potentially catalyzed by the initiative. 

However, based on this analysis alone, it is challenging to determine SeaBOS’ impact on the Japanese seafood industry as a whole. As illustrated in Figure 4, the frameworks promoting sustainable seafood industries—including certification schemes like the MSC and the ASC, as well as symposiums such as the Sustainable Seafood Summit—are densely interconnected, and with complex but significant overlaps. In addition, changes in legal frameworks exert significant influence on sustainability practices and reporting standards. Our study cannot, therefore, definitively conclude whether SeaBOS has induced cascading effects or industry-level transformation. Instead, it provides some initial indicators of potential cascading change. Related to this, speaking at a previous Sustainable Seafood Summit, one company representative stated the remarkable cooperation on sustainability initiatives among the three Japanese member companies (Maruha Nichiro, Nissui, and Kyokuyo) since joining SeaBOS, companies that are usually market competitors, suggesting a sense of potential felt among the member companies themselves.

In the future, other evaluation methods such as qualitative research with interview data, theoretical analysis using simulation models, and continuous monitoring over extended time periods can help more comprehensively assess the potential impacts of pre-competitive initiatives. Furthermore, increased transparency, particularly among domestic seafood companies, will be essential. 

Figure 4.  Overlapping corporate engagement with relevant international initiatives. The dots on the lines of the TSSS indicate the speaking participation of a representative from each company at the event for the year indicated.

Suggestions for Japanese seafood companies to promote sustainable management in the future

Based on the results of this analysis, we offer the following recommendations for Japanese seafood companies aiming to strengthen their sustainability management:

1.Learn from peers with similar characteristics.
 “Japanese seafood companies” constitute a highly diverse group with significant variations in resources and business activities.  To account for this diversity, we classified the 17 companies in our study into four groups. We recommend that company staff refer to or adapt sustainability approaches from peer organizations with similar characteristics to their own, to help them develop management practices suited to their specific needs and capacities. 

2.Adopt a broader perspective on sustainability efforts.
We found that different companies showed different strengths on different issues. For instance, large trading companies are more advanced in reporting transparency and traceability, as well as in human rights and climate change initiatives. In contrast, the three SeaBOS member companies show more advanced efforts when it comes to dealing with IUU fishing and marine plastics. Sustainability thus encompasses a broad spectrum of considerations, which go far beyond climate change mitigation, that a given company may be more or less well-positioned to address. Evaluating management practices from diverse perspectives can therefore help to promote more comprehensive approaches.

3.Foster collaboration with scientists, cross-border partnerships, and industry peers.
We found that a wide range of organizations and events can influence companies’ sustainability management. As demonstrated in Figure 4, investors, legal frameworks, competition, and inter-company cooperation may all affect sustainability performance. In such a complex landscape, strengthening science-based collaboration among competing companies, for instance through initiatives such as SeaBOS, and creating platforms for sharing best practices among diverse stakeholders, as facilitated by the Sustainable Seafood Summit, can help to create valuable industry-wide synergies.

4.Emphasize the value of disclosure and the responsibility of sustainability performance evaluators
Non-financial disclosures constitute valuable assets both to companies and the industry as a whole. Without disclosure, it is difficult to assess the current status of companies, or to hold meaningful discussions about future improvements. Documenting and sharing sustainability information thus represents the first step toward advancing sustainability management. Companies should therefore promote comprehensive information disclosure, taking the lead from peers that have successfully and transparently implemented sustainability practices.

At the same time, researchers or practitioners seeking to analyze and evaluate such information must consider that companies disclose non-financial information through various media, and that this information is not always written in English. This analysis, for instance, gathered data from six different sources, some of which were only available in Japanese. While companies should strive for publicly available and inclusive information sharing, evaluators also have a responsibility to understand performance from multiple perspectives and to take steps to mitigate socio-cultural and language barriers.

Author’s Profile: 

Shun Kageyama
Research Unit Technician at the Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University (OIST)
Born in 1998, in Saitama, Japan. After graduating from the University of Tokyo, he enrolled in the master’s program at the Stockholm Resilience Center in Sweden from August 2022 to June 2024. From May 2023 to November 2024, he worked as a project assistant at SeaBOS, where he conducted research analysis and wrote a paper. In May 2023, he also attended the SeaBOS working group discussion. He started his current position in January 2025. His specialities are sustainability and ocean governance.

^*1 Kyokuyo departed from SeaBOS in April 2024. However, since it was a SeaBOS member for the duration of the time frame of this analysis (2013–2022), we treated the company as such. Section 4.2 of the paper provides further reflection on the company’s departure, so please refer to it for more information.
^*2See this paper:
^*3 Refer to this paper:
^*4See this report:
^*5See this article: