|
Background
-
OECD Workshop |
OECD Workshop on IUU Fishing Activities
Key observations and findings by
the Workshop Chairs
The
issue of illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing has moved to the
forefront of the international fisheries policy agenda in recent years.
Governments around the world have recognised the negative effects of IUU
fishing activities on resource sustainability, biodiversity and economic and
social sustainability. In many cases, the burden is borne by the fishing
industry. The OECD hosted a workshop on IUU fishing activities in Paris on
19-20 April 2004. The objective of the workshop was to gather information
and data on the extent of IUU fishing and identify the economic and social
drivers to IUU fishing. Around 120 experts from OECD and non-OECD countries,
regional fisheries management organizations, international governmental
organizations, non-governmental organizations and academia attended the
workshop.
The
workshop was organized around 4 sessions addressing: the state of play of
IUU fishing; data and information needs; economic and social drivers; and
possible future actions. The following observations and findings from the
Workshop have been compiled by the Workshop Chairs.
THE
STATE OF PLAY ON IUU FISHING
-
IUU fishing is a world-wide
problem, affecting both domestic waters and the high seas, and all types
of fishing vessels, regardless of their size or gear.
-
IUU fishing is harmful to
fish stocks and undermines the efficiency of measures adopted nationally
and internationally to secure fish stocks for the future.
-
IUU activities also have
adverse effects on the marine ecosystem, notably on the populations of
seabirds, marine mammals, sea turtles and bio-diversity as a whole
(discards, etc.).
-
IUU fishing distorts
competition and jeopardizes the economic survival of those who fish in
accordance with the law and in compliance with relevant conservation and
management measures.
-
There are important social
costs associated with IUU fishing as it affects the livelihoods of fishing
communities, particularly in developing countries, and because many of the
crew on IUU fishing vessels are from poor and underdeveloped parts of the
world and often working under poor social and safety conditions.
-
The impact of IUU fishing
for some species (primarily tuna and tuna-like species) is global, whereas
that for other species (e.g., Patagonian toothfish and Orange roughy) is
specific to those areas where such species occur. This means that global
and local solutions are required, as well as solutions tailored to
specific species.
-
There is a concern that
excess capacity in fisheries in OECD countries can lead to a spillover of
capacity into IUU fishing activities.
-
IUU fishing is a dynamic
and multi-faceted problem and no single strategy is sufficient to
eliminate or reduce IUU fishing — a concerted and multi-pronged approach
is required nationally, regionally and internationally, and by type of
fishery. The full range of players should be involved in helping bring
forward solutions to the IUU problem.
-
Many developed and
developing states have not been fully responsible in complying with their
responsibilities as flag states, port states, coastal states, states of
vessel owners and trading nations.
-
The FAO International Plan of Action to combat IUU fishing contains tools
to tackle the IUU issue. The question is to find ways to better implement
such tools.
INFORMATION AND DATA
NEEDS
-
In spite of recent
improvements in information collection, there remains a lack of systematic
and comprehensive information on the extent of IUU operations and impacts.
This is compounded by the varying level in quality, accessibility,
reliability and usefulness of the available data.
-
There
are a number of international instruments addressing the collection of
fisheries information and statistics. However, these need to be integrated
and further, there remains a need for improvement in national statistics
on trade in fish and fish products, especially in relation to IUU fishing.
-
There is a diversity of
actors involved in gathering, processing and disseminating information on
IUU fishing activities — governments, intergovernmental organizations,
RFMOs, RFBs, NGOs and industry.
-
Trade-tracking and the
resulting accumulation of information by market countries are an enormous
task but it is very important for the creation of effective measures to
combat IUU fishing.
-
There is a need to broaden the scope of the information gathered so it
covers activities and situations “upstream” and “downstream” of the IUU
fishing operations themselves. This will help to better define the nature
and scope of IUU fishing and to improve knowledge of the economic and
social forces which drive IUU fishing in order to help target future
actions.
ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL
DRIVERS
-
Under current conditions,
IUU activities can be extremely profitable due, amongst other factors, to
lower cost structures than for compliant fishing activities. Strategies to
combat IUU fishing need to include measures that reduce the relative
benefits and raise the costs of IUU fishing.
-
The demonstration effect
achieved by government and RFMO efforts in fighting IUU activities is
significant. This will provide positive signals to legal fishers and send
the message to IUU fishers that their products will be excluded from the
international market and that their activities will not be tolerated.
-
Inefficient domestic
fisheries management may work as a driver for IUU fishing activities; the
more economically efficient management is the higher the fisher income
will be and thus lessen the incentive to engage in IUU activities.
-
The size of penalties and
the risk of being apprehended is not generally a sufficient deterrent to
IUU fishing activities. This is complicated by the ease of re-flagging
vessels and the difficulties in tracking company structures and
identifying beneficial owners of IUU vessels. The lack of harmonisation of
penalties across countries is also a concern.
-
IUU fishing inflicts
damage on a law abiding fishing industry aiming at sustainable
exploitation.
-
IUU fishing activities
also make it harder for countries to strike a balance between food
security and protection of the marine environment.
POSSIBLE ACTIONS
-
There is a wide range of
possible measures that can be undertaken to address the problem of IUU
fishing. These will need to cover legal, institutional, economic and
social dimensions and will require the involvement of multiple players in
the national, regional and international fisheries sectors.
-
Determining the cost-effectiveness of alternate approaches to addressing
IUU fishing problems should be undertaken to help identify priorities
amongst the possible options so that the best results can be obtained from
limited resources that are available to national governments and
international organizations.
Flag state actions
-
Links between flags of
convenience and tax havens have been established and a more concerted
approach towards both could be undertaken.
-
There is a need to improve
transparency on the procedures and conditions for re-flagging and
de-flagging.
-
More countries could
usefully investigate the possibilities for applying extra-territorial
rules for their nationals.
-
The penalties for IUU offences should be significantly increased and
harmonised between jurisdictions.
Port state actions
-
The development of
minimum guidelines for port state controls and
actions against IUU fishers, particularly with respect to the use of prior
notice and inspection requirements (including health and safety
conditions),
should be encouraged. The harmonisation of these
controls and actions should be a priority.
-
There is a need to ensure a
broader use of port state control measures including inspections,
preventing access to services and goods of IUU vessels
-
There needs to be an
agreement to make it illegal to tranship, land and trade in IUU fish.
-
There is also a need to improve the monitoring of the provision of at-sea
services and transhipment of fish and fish products.
Coastal state actions and
international trade responses
-
It is necessary to augment
monitoring, control and surveillance capacities and improve fisheries
management across the board, but in particular in developing countries.
-
Improving and extending the
use of catch and trade documentation schemes could help provide additional
information on IUU activities.
-
Fair, transparent and
non-discriminatory countermeasures should be adopted,
consistent with international law, against
countries that do not comply with the conservation and management measures
adopted by RFMOs or fail to effectively control the vessels flying their
flag in order to ensure they comply with the conservation and management
measures adopted by RFMOs.
-
Countries should identify the area
of catch and name of fishing vessel and its past history (of name and
flag) in order to collect information necessary for better fisheries
management and elimination of IUU fishing.
RFMO actions
-
Strengthening the mandate
and role of RFMOs and RFBs, in particular their possibilities for tracking
IUU fishing, is an important requirement.
-
There is a need to improve
information sharing and cooperation among RFMOs, particularly in terms of
linking and integrating their data on IUU fishing activities.
-
More RFMOs should consider
publishing lists of companies and vessels engaged in high seas IUU
activities and lists of vessels that are authorized to fish. The use of
positive and negative lists of IUU fishing vessels and companies is
strongly encouraged in this regard.
-
The creation of a global record/register of authorised fishing vessels
that are technically capable of engaging in high seas fishing should be
considered.
-
International
coordination
-
Resources matter: more
technical and financial resources are needed for capacity building, in
particular in the developing states for monitoring, control and
surveillance, and in all activities in combating IUU activities.
-
The international community
should move to ratify relevant international treaties on labour and
working conditions in the maritime sector in order to strengthen
international hard and soft laws to protect fishing crews in general.
-
Improved monitoring foreign
direct investments (out-going and in-coming) in the fishing sector will
assist in tracking potential IUU fishing operations.
-
Work should be undertaken
nationally and multilaterally to lift the veil of corporate secrecy
surrounding the companies undertaking IUU fishing activities and related
services. Partnerships between public authorities and businesses offer
important scope in the fight against IUU. In this regard, the OECD
Guidelines for Multinationals offers some possibilities that could be
followed-up by national regulatory authorities.
-
A major effort is required,
in particular by regional fisheries management organisations and market
countries, to collect and disseminate relevant information.
-
The efforts already underway to improve information at all levels and
mechanisms to share information need to be supported and strengthened.
NGO and private sector
actions
-
Whenever possible,
governments should consider bilateral consultation with businesses engaged
in IUU activities to determine if alternative means of getting IUU vessels
out of the business can be found.
-
There should be continued
efforts to communicate the IUU problem, for example through
promotional/educational campaigns with the market including intermediate
buyers, processors, distributors and consumers. Such activities will help
raise awareness of the problem and improve the knowledge of the social,
economic and environmental consequences of IUU activities.
-
Industry and NGOs should be encouraged to continue to self-organise their
response to IUU fishing and information collection.
|
|
