Measuring welfare in sea bass and sea bream farming

Welcome to our Sea Bass and Sea Bream Welfare Scorecard: a powerful tool designed to incentivise producers to adopt clear, public-facing welfare commitments, policies and reporting.

The Scorecard benchmarks producers against 11 key welfare criteria, using publicly available information such commitments, policies and reports. These criteria cover critical areas such as stocking density, humane slaughter and welfare assessment.

Each welfare parameter is assessed independently, with results presented on a five-tier scale, providing a clear visual benchmark of welfare standards while tracking progress over time.

The Sea Bass and Sea Bream Welfare Scorecard underscores the importance of publishing welfare policies and commitments, and encourages transparent reporting on current practices to raise awareness and accountability. It also stimulates investment in higher welfare practices.

By providing an authoritative framework for reporting and recognising responsible policies, it enables producers - and the retailers they supply – to deliver measurable improvements in farmed sea bass and sea bream welfare.

Sea bass and Sea bream Welfare Scorecard 2025

The 2025 Sea Bass and Sea Bream Welfare Scorecard evaluates the performance and establishes the baseline of 13 producers, including Abalioglu, Avramar, Cooke, Cromaris, Galaxidi, Gloria Maris, Gruppo del Pesce, Gumusdoga, Kefalonia, Kiliç, Philosofish, Sursan, and Waterhouse. Together, the assessed companies span six countries and account for around 36% of global sea bass and sea bream production.

The 2025 Scorecard revealed that most producers did not communicate widely about their welfare practices and their communication focused on one or two criteria. Still, 5 out of the 13 assessed producers – Avramar, Cromaris, Kefalonia, Kiliç and Waterhouse – have communicated about most of the criteria included in the assessment, even when some of them qualified as Tier 1, setting an example and representation on the direction that the industry should follow. Yet, there is still significant room for further improvement in transparency, reporting and policy development.