The eco-certification movement has gained significant momentum is some developing country industries, products, and markets, but the certification of wild-caught seafood production in developing country contexts is limited. In wild-capture fisheries, eco-certification has been relatively limited in Africa since the growth of certification programs expanded rapidly in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Few African fisheries have attained certification to standards set by the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC), the most prominent voluntary third-party certifier for wild-captured fisheries partly because certification to the MSC requires relatively significant resources and capacity. In response, proponents of eco-certification such as the World Wildlife Fund, the Sustainable Fisheries Partnership and the Conservation Alliance for Seafood Solutions, initiated and developed multi-stakeholder Fishery Improvement Projects (FIPs) in the 2010s to help fisheries make improvements and meet sustainability indicators. Few researchers have examined FIPs within an African context, however, and little is known about how FIPs have been implemented in the African context. Drawing on literature review and key informant interviews with stakeholders involved in FIPs in the African context, this research examines the motivation and role of different actors and organizations within FIPs and the interactions among these actors and organizations. The findings suggest that international actors play significant roles in FIPs in early African cases, with significant international efforts to support capacity-building including fisheries management capacity. Local governments are often portrayed by actors and organizations involved in FIPs as weak and lacking enthusiasm. Producers, such as small-scale fishers, are generally not meaningfully integrated into formal FIP processes. These findings suggest that FIPs are shaped by complex and contested political economies of transnational governance with power differences influencing the motivation and interaction of participants. The political economy of FIPs includes complex and challenging opportunities and barriers to inclusion and participation and a general ambiguity of social development questions
