We assess the fairness of our trading relationship with fishers. This has a complication compared to ‘good’ and ‘clean’ because it is partly about how the the fishermen assess us.

1. 1. Worst … restaurants have no link and no knowledge of who caught the fish, their working conditions, or pay;
   

2. 2. Poor … we have a broad idea of working conditions and remuneration in the fleet (which appear to be typical of the industry), but no specific knowledge of the fishermen who caught our fish;
   

3. 3. Transitional … in direct contact with fishermen catching our fish. There is room for improvement, so that they get a financial reward for introducing measures we would like, such as using ice as fish are brought on deck. But change depends partly on actions of others. There could be complications as a result of having to buy through an established supply chain.
   

4. 4. Good … fishermen and restaurants generally happy with trading relationship, and in control of the terms of that relationship. Ongoing work on what might be done to make it even better.
   

5. 5. Best… fishermen and restaurants very happy with a well established trading relationship that provides security to both parties and allow for forward planning. Seen  as a model by others.