In December 2025, SEG announced a consultation on a possible amendment to its Standard, prompted by the need to restore balance between long-term ambition and practical implementation in a market increasingly shaped by constrained supply and complex risk. Following a period of constructive engagement with stakeholders across the eel value chain, Criterion 1.3 of the Standard has now been revised, reducing the minimum proportion of SEG-certified eel that an organisation must trade in to gain or retain certification from 95 to 75 percent. The change takes immediate effect and represents what SEG considers a necessary and proportionate response to market conditions, providing certainty for stakeholders while preserving the possibility of meeting more ambitious objectives over time.

• Before: The organisation trades in 95 – 100% of SEG certified responsibly sourced eel from the glass eel supply chain and has the documentation to demonstrate that.

• After: The organisation trades in at least 75% of SEG certified responsibly sourced eel from the glass eel supply chain and has the documentation to demonstrate that.

The consultation, advertised on the SEG website, and sent direct to affected stakeholders,  brought together perspectives from auditors, farms, processors, traders, and trade associations across five European Union countries. While modest in scale, it was broad in scope: of the 83 stakeholders contacted directly by SEG, ten submitted formal responses, representing around 12 percent of those invited, with the most active group being eel farms. Participants were invited to express a preference from three substantive policy options: Option 1 proposed retaining the existing 95 to 100 percent threshold; Option 2 suggested an intermediate adjustment, which ultimately attracted no support; and Option 3 proposed lowering the threshold to 75 percent. Although views differed, a clear majority favoured the third option, with many respondents pointing to the structural reality that farms and processors must often operate at or near full capacity regardless of the short-term fluctuations in certified supply. Under such conditions, a rigidly high threshold risked forcing otherwise responsible operators to reduce output or withdraw from the market altogether.

While the distribution of preferences was influential, SEG’s decision weighed quantitative results from the consultation with the substance and implications of the arguments presented. Many of the supporters of Option 3 emphasised operational necessity, noting that the inability to secure sufficient certified supply should not, in itself, disqualify organisations committed to responsible practice. Others warned that requirements set too high could inadvertently advantage a small number of commercial operators with preferential access to certified supply, raising barriers to entry and increasing the risk of market concentration and uncompetitive practices. Those favouring Option 1, by contrast, focused on the issue of maintaining SEG’s reputation and the comparability of audits conducted under different thresholds. In adopting Option 3, SEG concluded that a 75 percent requirement remains ambitious in real-world terms, while reducing the risk of unintended consequences that could arise from maintaining a higher threshold, including a decrease in the proportion of operators committing to SEG’s high standards.

In approving the amendment, the SEG Board was careful to stress that the change does not represent a retreat from its ambitions. The organisation has reaffirmed its long-term objective of returning to the 95 to 100 percent threshold, potentially through incremental, step-wise increases over the coming years. Before any future changes are introduced, SEG has committed to another phase of consultation and risk assessment to ensure higher thresholds strengthen, rather than destabilise, the responsible eel sector. Throughout this period, SEG-certified eels will continue to be subject to the full assurance system for certification, traceability, and labelling, with clear separation from non-certified products. The amendment reflects SEG’s view that standards must evolve in sustained dialogue with the realities they seek to influence: by lowering the threshold in the short term while keeping higher targets firmly in sight, SEG aims to safeguard both the integrity of its system and the viability of the market it governs.

The analysis of the consultation can be viewed here:

• Dutch

• English

• French

• German

• Spanish

Consultation comments can be viewed here.  (Note, in English only and names removed for data protection purposes).