Target 14.7: Economic benefits to small island states
By 2030, increase the economic benefits to Small Island developing States and least developed countries from the sustainable use of marine resources, including through sustainable management of fisheries, aquaculture and tourism
Owners voting their values help. Others must carry most of it.
Why shareholder democracy is helpful
Economic benefits to small island states from fisheries, aquaculture and tourism are shaped by foreign industrial fleets, seafood buyers and cruise and hotel companies. The target, though, is primarily about national resource management and development finance. Investor-driven sourcing commitments improve the value of sustainably sourced product from developing-country fisheries. Thai Union, for example, has committed to source 100 percent of wild-caught seafood from sustainably managed or improving fisheries by 2030. Pew shows the $22 billion in harmful subsidies mainly favors industrial fleets that compete with SIDS and LDC fishers. No shareholder resolution specific to benefits for small island states is on record. Owners help at the margin; governments and development financiers carry the outcome.
How this was scoredHelpful
Helpful. Owners voting their values help. Others must carry most of it.
We have not yet written down the two answers behind this rating. Recording them on every item, so a reader can check the reasoning and not only the conclusion, is work in progress.
Every rating is the higher of two answers, one for what companies do and one for what they spend to stop the outcome, because the same vote reaches both. See the full method.
Sources
2 campaigns on record
Trace all of its seafood back to the boat or the farm it came from, source all wild-caught seafood from fisheries that are well managed or actively improving by 2030, and make sure every vessel it buys from follows practices that stop illegal and unreported fishing.
Result: No proposal went to a vote. This is FAIRR's company assessment of Thai Union within its collaborative Seafood Traceability Engagement, whose Phase 2 was supported by 45 investors representing more than US$9.6 trillion in combined assets. The individual investor signatories are not named on the page. FAIRR records Thai Union as holding a group-level traceability commitment for both wild-caught and farmed seafood.
Thai Union has a group-level commitment, under its SeaChange 2030 strategy, to source all of its wild-caught seafood from fisheries demonstrably managed within biologically sustainable limits or actively progressing through credible improvement programmes, and has pledged US$200 million to implement that strategy. FAIRR records that the company reports 100 percent paper-based traceability for farmed shrimp traced back to the farm, and zero percent for traceability that is digital and interoperable to the GDST standard, and that it does not disclose interim milestones ahead of 2030. FAIRR's page does not say the engagement caused these commitments, and this row does not claim it did.
Seafood Traceability Engagement: Thai Union Group PCL, FAIRR Initiative, 2026-02-17
Commit to comprehensive supply chain traceability systems and disclose implementation strategy and progress with third-party verification.
Result: Phase 2 of the engagement was supported by 45 investors representing more than US$9.6 trillion in combined assets, and concluded with a progress report published in February 2026. Four of the seven companies assessed now hold a robust traceability commitment, up from two in Phase 1: Maruha Nichiro and Mitsubishi disclosed new commitments in 2025, joining Thai Union and Charoen Pokphand Foods, and Thai Union and Mitsubishi explicitly reference the Global Dialogue on Seafood Traceability standard.
No engaged company yet discloses a comprehensive implementation strategy and milestones for the traceability commitments it has made, and most operational traceability systems are not aligned with leading practice. FAIRR published the Phase 2 progress report, Traceability in Seafood Supply Chains: An Imperative for Investors, in February 2026 and has moved the engagement to Phase 3 for 2026 and 2027.
How this rating was made
Every item on every one of our maps is read against one question: how far does this depend on the people who own companies voting their values? We answer it twice, once for what companies do and once for what they spend to stop the outcome, and take whichever answer is higher, since the same vote reaches both. The score carries its reasoning and its sources so that a reader can check it rather than take it.
- Pivotal. Owners voting their values can deliver most of the outcome.
- Necessary. Owners remove an obstacle nothing else removes, and others must also act.
- Helpful. Owners voting their values help, and others carry most of it.
- Independent. This moves without owners. Other levers carry it.
The advocacy record on this page holds only what a source we opened says happened. Where we searched and found nothing, the page says so rather than leaving a silence. Where a campaign names a filer the source does not name, it says that too. Ratings are ours; the list of subjects is UN Sustainable Development Goals's, and we link to their original.
How we score dependency, in full.