Australians are being urged to ‘check their cans’ and take a closer look at what’s behind the label of their favourite canned tuna.
A “first-of-its-kind” academic study from the University of Tasmania, alongside fresh consumer insights from YouGov, reveals which brands can back up their environmental claims — and which may fall short on evidence.
According to YouGov, canned tuna is a pantry staple for 78% of surveyed Australians, yet a new report shows many shoppers are being left in the dark when it comes to how their tuna is sourced. The University of Tasmania’s study, ‘Greenwashing in the Tuna Industry’, is the first to score 14 commonly purchased canned tuna brands against the ACCC’s principles for making environmental claims, providing an evidence-based benchmark that cuts through greenwash and guesswork.
“Brands generally lacked sufficient evidence to support their environmental claims. There were widespread issues with omitting key information, and broad, unqualified claims were common,” reads a statement. “In addition, communication clarity was divided, while some brands effectively conveyed their sustainability claims, others used complex language.”
YouGov states that while four in five (79%) say they look to find out if the canned tuna they purchase is sustainable, most rely on unverified brand claims. Only 15% of surveyed Australians are looking for independently verified ecolabels.
“Without independent verification, consumers can’t know if their tuna came from healthy, responsibly managed fisheries – or if it’s contributing to overfishing and the destruction of marine habitats,” says Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) Program Director of Oceania Anne Gabriel.
“Overall, this report underscores the need for clearer sustainability messaging and improved accountability among brand packaging to ensure consumers can make informed choices. The MSC certification process involves rigorous, science-based standards, impartial audits, and ongoing assessments to ensure fisheries continuously improve.”
Coles, John West, The Stock Merchant, Little Tuna, Walker’s Tuna and Safcol emerged as leaders for their “credible, transparent information communicating their sustainability practices and adherence to ACCC guidelines setting a benchmark for industry-wide practice”.
Independent verification essential
Based on scoring patterns, the research concluded that brands with third-party sustainability accreditation such as MSC certification achieved a better alignment with the ACCC principles than other brands.
“Our analysis shows that independent certification isn’t just helpful – it’s essential,” says Associate Professor Dan Daugaard, lead researcher at the University of Tasmania. “Brands with verified claims are more aligned with regulatory standards and far more likely to win consumer trust.
“Environmental claims need to be honest, accurate, and backed by robust evidence. Certification by independent bodies like the MSC can help brands meet these expectations – but it’s also up to retailers and producers to lift the standard of communication and transparency.”
Over half (54%) of all wild caught tuna globally is said to now be MSC certified sustainable.
Ms Gabriel says that the only way consumers can be sure the seafood they purchase is caught by an MSC certified sustainable fishery is to look for the MSC blue fish tick label on the packaging.
“With 2030 fast approaching, it is critical we align our sourcing and shopping habits with the UN Sustainable Development Goals – particularly those focused on life below water, responsible consumption, and sustainable growth,” she says.
“This isn’t just a matter of corporate vs consumer responsibility – it’s a collective imperative. Every purchasing and sourcing decision is a chance to protect our oceans and secure a healthier future for people and planet.”
