As the ESG crowd is largely focused on the aftermath of COP21 in Paris and is dissecting how good the good news are, we want to highlight another glimmer of hope on a widely publicized issue of 2015: the unspeakable treatment of migrant labor on Thai fishing vessels.

According to Chris Lewa of the Arakon Project, which tracks migrant flow into the Thai fishing industry, the number of newly trafficked persons to enter the horrendous bottom of the barrel of Thai fishing industry appears to have significantly dropped, ushering in hope that anti-trafficking efforts in the region and by parties further downstream in the supply chain are bearing some fruit. And first words are being uttered that it’s not just about anti-trafficking efforts once the migrants are in transit but that efforts are needed practically and politically to address the underlying conditions that trigger migration due to destituteness on the home front in the first place.

Ample shocking reads on the subject have raised awareness globally:
The Guardian, the Associated Press (and follow-up here) and the New York Times have investigated and run shocking feature story series on this issue over the last two years, tracking the undignified, violent, horrific migrant labor conditions – slave labor! – to food that ends up on shelves in Western supermarkets. The US State Department downgraded Thailand to the lowest rung in its annual Trafficking in Persons report beginning in 2014. In November 2015, a Verite report commissioned by Nestlé, a firm squarely affected by the problem, was published that further cements the findings so far and offers specific recommendations for industry players.

Why does this matter for ESG analysis?
Because uncovering, understanding, and truly addressing the ESG Risks – and violations! – in supply chains is a momentous task and often met with a shoulder shrug due to overwhelming complexity as well as a lack of actual influence along long and opaque chains of suppliers and subcontractors – despite policies and proclamations to the contrary. It’s an issue where good intentions and cost implications collide. While energy efficiency done right doesn’t just bode well for environmental performance but can often benefit the bottom line in the long run, maintaining decent labor standards in primary industries almost always clashes with the notion of optimized (read: cheap) labor cost. So, be alerted to and be ok with a combination of price increases for seafood on your plate and lower margin in your seafood industry investments as the small cost for some gains in human rights elsewhere on our planet.